Matthew 5:22 Comentariu

This chapter, and the two that follow it, are a sermon; a famous sermon; the sermon upon the mount. It is the longest and fullest continued discourse of our Saviour that we have upon record in all the gospels. It is a practical discourse; there is not much of the credenda of Christianity in it - the things to be believed, but it is wholly taken up with the agenda - the things to be done; these Christ began with in his preaching; for if any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God. The circumstances of the sermon being accounted for (Mat 5:1, Mat 5:2), the sermon itself follows, the scope of which is, not to fill our heads with notions, but to guide and regulate our practice. I. He proposes blessedness as the end, and gives us the character of those who are entitled to blessedness (very different from the sentiments of a vain world), in eight beatitudes, which may justly be called paradoxes (Mat 5:3-12). II. He prescribes duty as the way, and gives us standing rules of that duty. He directs his disciples, 1. To understand what they are - the salt of the earth, and the lights of the world (Mat 5:13-16). 2. To understand what they have to do - they are to be governed by the moral law. Here is, (1.) A general ratification of the law, and a recommendation of it to us, as our rule (Mat 5:17-20). (2.) A particular rectification of divers mistakes; or, rather, a reformation of divers wilful, gross corruptions, which the scribes and Pharisees had introduced in their exposition of the law; and an authentic explication of divers branches which most needed to be explained and vindicated (Mat 5:20). Particularly, here is an explication, [1.] Of the sixth commandment, which forbids murder (Mat 5:21-26). [2.] Of the seventh commandment, against adultery (Mat 5:27-32). [3.] Of the third commandment (Mat 5:33-37). [4.] Of the law of retaliation (Mat 5:38-42). [5.] Of the law of brotherly love (Mat 5:43-48). And the scope of the whole is, to show that the law is spiritual.

And seeing the multitudes,.... The great concourse of people that followed him from the places before mentioned, he went up into a mountain; either to pray alone, which was sometimes his custom to do, or to shun the multitude; or rather, because it was a commodious place for teaching the people: and when he was set: not for rest, but in order to teach; for sitting was the posture of masters, or teachers, see Mat 13:2 Luk 4:20. The form in which the master and his disciples sat is thus described by Maimonides (z). "The master sits at the head, or in the chief place, and the disciples before him in a circuit, like a crown; so that they all see the master, and hear his words; and the master may not sit upon a seat, and the scholars upon the ground; but either all upon the earth, or upon seats: indeed from the beginning, or formerly, "the master used to sit", and the disciples stand; but before the destruction of the second temple, all used to teach their disciples as they were sitting.'' With respect to this latter custom, the Talmudists say (a), that "from the days of Moses, to Rabban Gamaliel (the master of the Apostle Paul), they did not learn the law, unless standing; after Rabban Gamaliel died, sickness came into the world, and they learnt the law sitting: hence it is a tradition, that after Rabban Gamaliel died, the glory of the law ceased.'' His disciples came unto him; not only the twelve, but the company, or multitude, of his disciples, Luk 6:17 which he made in the several places, where he had been preaching; for the number of his disciples was larger than John's. (z) Hilch. Talmud Torah, c. 4. sect. 2. (a) T. Bab. Megilla, fol. 21. 1. Vid. Misn. Sota, c. 9. sect. 15. & Jarchi, Maimon, & Bartenora in ib.

But I say unto you,.... This is a Rabbinical way of speaking, used when a question is determined, and a false notion is refuted; it is a magisterial form of expression, and well suits with Christ, the great teacher and master in Israel; who spake as one having authority, opposing himself, not to the law of "Moses, thou shalt not kill"; but to the false gloss the ancient doctors had put upon it, with which their later ones agreed. You say, that if one man kills another himself, he is to be put to death by the sanhedrim; and if he does it by proxy, he is to be left to the judgment of God, so wholly restraining the law to actual murder; but I affirm, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause, shall be in danger of judgment. By "brother" is meant, not in a religious sense, one that is of the same faith, or in the same church state; nor, in a strict natural sense, one that is so in the bonds of consanguinity; but in a large sense, any man, of whatsoever country or nation: for we are to be angry with no man; that is, as is rightly added, without a cause: for otherwise there is an anger which is not sinful, is in God, in Christ, in the holy angels; and is commendable in the people of God, when it arises from a true zeal for religion, the glory of God, and the interest of Christ; and is kindled against sin, their own, or others, all manner of vice, false doctrine, and false worship: but it is causeless anger which is here condemned by Christ, as a breach of the law, "thou shalt not kill"; and such persons are in danger of judgment; not of any of the courts of judicature among the Jews, as the sanhedrim of three, or of twenty three, or of seventy one, which took no notice of anger, as a passion in the mind, only of facts committed; but of the judgment of God, as in the preceding "verse", it being distinguished from the sanhedrim, or council, in the next clause. And whosoever shall say to his brother Raca, shall be in danger of the council, or "sanhedrim". The word Raca is expressive of indignation and contempt; it was used as a term of reproach. Some derive it from to "spit upon"; as if the person that used it thought the man he spoke to deserved to be spit upon, and treated in the most contemptuous manner: but rather the word signifies "empty" and "vain", and denotes a worthless, empty headed man; a man of no brains; a foolish, witless, fellow: so it is often used in Jewish writings. Take a few instances, as follow: "a certain person said to R. Jochanan (w), Rabbi, expound, for it becomes thee to expound; for as thou hast said, so have I seen: he replied to him, Reka, if thou hadst not seen, thou wouldst not have believed.'' Again (x), it happened to R. Simeon ben Eliezer of Migdal Edar, who went from the house of Rabbi; and he met with a certain man very much deformed; he says unto him, Reka, how many are the deformed sons of "Abraham our father?" Many more instances might be given (y). Now I do not find that the use of this reproachful word was cognizable by the Jewish sanhedrim, or great council; nor is it our Lord's meaning that it was, only that it ought to have been taken notice of in a proper manner, as well as actual murder. He adds, but whosoever shall say thou fool, shall be danger of hell fire. The word "fool" does not signify a man of weak parts, one that is very ignorant in things natural; this the word Raca imports; but a wicked reprobate man; in which sense Solomon often uses the word. The Persic version renders it here "wicked". There is a manifest gradation in the text from causeless anger in the breast, or reproachful words; and from thence to a censorious judging of a man's spiritual and eternal estate, which is what is here condemned. "Thou fool", is, thou wicked man, thou ungodly wretch, thou graceless creature, whose portion will be eternal damnation. Calling a man by such names was not allowed of by the Jews themselves, whose rules are: "he that calls his neighbour a servant, let him be excommunicated; a bastard, let him be beaten with forty stripes; "a wicked man", let him descend with him into his life or livelihood (z).'' The gloss upon it is, "as if he should say, to this the sanhedrim is not obliged, but it is lawful to hate him, yea to lessen his sustenance, and exercise his trade,'' which was done to bring him to poverty and distress. So, it seems, the sanhedrim were not obliged to take notice of him. Again, they say, "it is forbidden a man to call his neighbour by a name of reproach (a) everyone that calls his neighbour "a wicked man", shall be brought down to hell;'' which is pretty much what Christ here says, shall be in danger of hell fire; or deserving of hell fire; or liable to, and in danger of punishment, even "unto hell fire". An expression much like this may be observed in Jarchi, on Isa 24:23 where he speaks of some persons , "who are guilty", deserving, or in danger of "hell unto hell". The word here used, and which is often used in the New Testament for "hell", is but the Hebrew , "Ge-Hinnom", the valley of Hinnom, where the children were caused to pass through the fire to Mo. This place, the Jewish writers (b) say, "Was a place well known, near to Jerusalem, a valley, whose fire was never quenched; and in which they burned the bones of anything that was unclean, and dead carcasses, and other pollutions.'' Hence the word came to be used among them, as might be shown in innumerable instances, to express the place and state of the damned; and very fitly describes it. (w) T. Bab. Sanhedrim, fol. 100. 1. T. Bava Bathra, fol. 75. 1. (x) Massechet Derach Eretz, c. 4. fol. 18. 1. (y) Vid. T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 32. 2. Zohar in Exod. fol. 50. 2. (z) T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 28. 1. Bava Metzia, fol. 71. 1. (a) Zohar in Exod. fol. 50. 3. (b) Sepher Cosri, fol. 57. 2. Vid. Kimchi in Psal. xxvii. 13.

That we may not be as far from the ears of God as we are from His precepts, the memory of His precepts paves for our prayers a way unto heaven; of which precepts the chief is, that we go not up unto God's altar before we compose whatever of discord or offence we have contracted with our brethren. For what sort of deed is it to approach the peace of God without peace? the remission of debts while you retain them? How will he appease his Father who is angry with his brother, when from the beginning "all anger" is forbidden us? For even Joseph, when dismissing his brethren for the purpose of fetching their father, said, "And be not angry in the way.

But after He has supervened, and has united the grace of faith with patience, now it is no longer lawful to assail even with word, nor to say "fool" even, without "danger of the judgment.

“Whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ shall be liable to the council.” One who reproaches with empty-headedness someone who is filled with the Holy Spirit becomes liable to the council of holy men and is to expiate this outrage against the Holy Spirit through punishment handed down by the holy judges. “Whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be liable to the hell of fire.” … Thus whatever the law has not condemned as to a person’s works, the faith of the Gospels castigates because of one’s readiness simply to use insulting words.

Or, he who reproaches with emptiness one full of the Holy Spirit, will he arraigned in the assembly of the Saints, and by their sentence will be punished for an affront against that Holy Spirit Himself.

He has said two things: “Whoever says, ‘Raca,’ and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ ” referring foolishness to the soul, and “despicable” to things of the body. By this he describes one who assumes an air of superiority, exalts himself over his brothers in the faith. Such a one hates them and turns away from them or looks down upon them with disgust or, frequently, passes them by as not worthy of a single look. He derives this sense of superiority from advantages of either body or soul and, on this account, looks down on his brothers as inferior to him. Such a person, Jesus says, is not considered by me as immune from condemnation. For the one who hates is akin to a murderer; such a person ought especially to have had love for these others on account of their shared faith, even though their common human nature should have been reason enough to unite them in friendship.

"But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause, shall be in danger of the judgment." Seest thou authority in perfection? Seest thou a bearing suited to a legislator? Why, which among prophets ever spake on this wise? which among righteous men? which among patriarchs? None; but, "Thus saith the Lord." But the Son not so. Because they were publishing their Master's commands, He His Father's. And when I say, "His Father's," I mean His own. "For mine," saith He, "are thine, and thine are mine." And they had their fellow-servants to legislate for, He His own servants. Let us now ask those who reject the law, "is, 'Be not angry' contrary to 'Do no murder'? or is not the one commandment the completion and the development of the other?" Clearly the one is the fulfilling of the other, and that is greater on this very account. Since he who is not stirred up to anger, will much more refrain from murder; and he who bridles wrath will much more keep his hands to himself. For wrath is the root of murder. And you see that He who cuts up the root will much more remove the branches; or rather, will not permit them so much as to shoot out at all. Not therefore to abolish the law did He make these enactments, but for the more complete observation of it. For with what design did the law enjoin these things? Was it not, that no one might slay his neighbor? It follows, that he who was opposing the law would have to enjoin murder. For to murder, were the contrary to doing no murder. But if He doth not suffer one even to be angry, the mind of the law is established by Him more completely. For he that studies to avoid murder will not refrain from it equally with him that hath put away even anger; this latter being further removed from the crime. But these things we have said, as one might say them incidentally, concerning all the commandments. Now we must go on to that which is before us, and keep to the thread of what had been affirmed. "He that is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:" so He speaks. Thus He hath not altogether taken the thing away: first, because it is not possible, being a man, to be freed from passions: we may indeed get the dominion over them, but to be altogether without them is out of the question. Next, because this passion is even useful, if we know how to use it at the suitable time. See, for instance, what great good was wrought by that anger of Paul, which he felt against the Corinthians, on that well-known occasion; and how, as it delivered them from a grievous pest, so by the same means again he recovered the people of the Galatians likewise, which had fallen aside; and others too beside these. What then is the proper time for anger? When we are not avenging ourselves, but checking others in their lawless freaks, or forcing them to attend in their negligence. And what is the unsuitable time? When we do so as avenging ourselves: which Paul also forbidding, said "Avenge not yourselves, dearly beloved, but rather give place unto wrath." When we are contending for riches: yea, for this hath he also taken away, where he saith, "Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?" For as this last sort is superfluous, so is the first necessary and profitable. But most men do the contrary; becoming like wild beasts when they are injured themselves, but remiss and cowardly when they see despite done to another: both which are just opposite to the laws of the Gospel. Being angry then is not a transgression, but being so unseasonably. For this cause the prophet also said, "Be ye angry, and sin not." "And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council." By the council in this place He means the tribunal of the Hebrews: and He hath mentioned this now, on purpose that He might not seem everywhere to play the stranger and innovator. But this word, "Raca," is not an expression of a great insolence, but rather of some contempt and slight on the part of the speaker. For as we, giving orders either to our servants, or to any very inferior person, say, "Away with thee; you here, tell such an one:" so they who make use of the Syrians' language say, "Raca," putting that word in stead of "thou." But God, the lover of man, roots up even the least faults, commanding us to behave to one another in seemly manner, and with due respect; and this with a view of destroying hereby also the greater. "But whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." To many this commandment hath appeared grievous and galling, if for a mere word we are really to pay so great a penalty. And some even say that it was spoken rather hyperbolically. But I fear lest, when we have deceived ourselves with words here, we may in deeds there suffer that extreme punishment. For wherefore, tell me, doth the commandment seem overburdensome? Knowest thou not that most punishments and most sins have their beginning from words? Yea, for by words are blasphemies, and denials are by words, and revilings, and reproaches, and perjuries, and bearing false witness. Regard not then its being a mere word, but whether it have not much danger, this do thou inquire. Art thou ignorant that in the season of enmity, when wrath is inflamed, and the soul kindled, even the least thing appears great, and what is not very reproachful is counted intolerable? And often these little things have given birth even to murder, and overthrown whole cities. For just as where friendship is, even grievous things are light, so where enmity lies beneath, very trifles appear intolerable. And however simply a word be spoken, it is surmised to have been spoken with an evil meaning. And see how He proceeds by little and little in His punishments, all but excusing Himself unto thee, and signifying that His desire indeed is to threaten nothing of the kind, but that we drag Him on to such denunciations. For observe: "I bade thee," saith He, "not be angry for nought, because thou art in danger of the judgment. Thou hast despised the former commandment: see what anger hath produced; it hath led thee on straightway to insult, for thou hast called thy brother 'Raca.' Again, I set another punishment, 'the council.' If thou overlook even this, and proceed to that which is more grievous, I visit thee no longer with these finite punishments, but with the undying penalty of hell, lest after this thou shouldest break forth even to murder." For there is nothing, nothing in the world more intolerable than insolence; it is what hath very great power to sting a man's soul. But when the word too which is spoken is in itself more wounding than the insolence, the blaze becomes twice as great. Think it not then a light thing to call another "fool." For when of that which separates us from the brutes, and by which especially we are human beings, namely, the mind and the understanding, when of this thou hast robbed thy brother, thou hast deprived him of all his nobleness. Let us not then regard the words merely, but realizing the things themselves, and his feeling, let us consider how great a wound is made by this word, and unto how much evil it proceeds. For this cause Paul likewise cast out of the kingdom not only "the adulterous" and "the effeminate," but "the revilers" also. And with great reason: for the insolent man mars all the beauty of charity, and casts upon his neighbor unnumbered ills, and works up lasting enmities, and tears asunder the members of Christ, and is daily driving away that peace which God so desires: giving much vantage ground unto the devil by his injurious ways, and making him the stronger. Therefore Christ Himself, cutting out the sinews of the devil's power, brought in this law. For indeed He makes much account of love: this being above all things the mother of every good, and the badge of His disciples, and the bond which holds together our whole condition. With reason therefore doth He remove with great earnestness the roots and the sources of that hatred which utterly spoils it.

(Verse 22) Because whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment. In some manuscripts it is added, without cause: but in the true definitive sentence, anger is completely eliminated, as the Scripture says: Whoever is angry with his brother. For if we are commanded to offer the other cheek to the one who strikes us, and to love our enemies, and to pray for those who persecute us (Luke 6), all occasion for anger is removed. Therefore, without cause must be removed, because the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God (James 1). But whoever says to his brother, 'Raca,' shall be liable to the council. This word 'Raca' is properly of the Hebrews: for Raca signifies 'empty,' that is, foolish or senseless: which we can call a common insult, without a brain. If we are to give an account for idle words, how much more for an insult (Matthew 5:22)! But it is also distinctly added: Whoever says to his brother, 'Raca.' For our brother is no one else, unless he has the same Father as us. When someone believes in God in the same way and knows Christ as the wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1): by what means can it be indicated by the praise of foolishness? But whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire. Ἀπὸ κοινοῦ ex superioribus subauditur: Whoever says to his brother, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire. For whoever says to a believer, 'You fool!' is impious in religion.

Some copies add here the words, without cause; but by the true readingc the precept is made unconditional, and anger altogether forbidden. For when we are told to pray for them that persecute us, all occasion of anger is taken away. The words without cause then must be erased, for the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. Or, Racha is a Hebrew word signifying, 'empty,' 'vain;' as we might say in the common phrase of reproach, 'empty-pate.' Observe that He says brother; for who is our brother, but he who has the same Father as ourselves?

What are we to do? "Whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be liable to the hell of fire." But "no human being can tame the tongue." Will everyone therefore go to the hell of fire? By no means. "Lord, you have become our refuge from generation to generation." Your wrath is just. You send no one to hell unjustly. "Where shall I go from your spirit? or where shall I flee from your presence," unless to you? Thus let us understand, my dearly beloved, that if no human being can tame the tongue, we must take refuge in God, who will tame it. Does your own human nature prevent you from taming your tongue? "No human being can tame the tongue."Consider this analogy from the animals that we tame. A horse does not tame itself; a camel does not tame itself; an elephant does not tame itself; a snake does not tame itself; a lion does not tame itself. So too a man does not tame himself. In order to tame a horse, an ox, a camel, an elephant, a lion and a snake, a human being is required. Therefore God should be required in order for a human being to be tamed.

(de Civ. Dei, ix. 4.) There are two different opinions among philosophers concerning the passions of the mind: the Stoics do not allow that any passion is incident to the wise man; the Peripatetics affirm that they are incident to the wise man but in a moderate degree and subject to reason; as, for example, when mercy is shown in such a manner that justice is preserved. But in the Christian rule we do not enquire whether the mind is first affected with anger or with sorrow, but whence. (Retract. i. 19.) This also we affirm should be taken into consideration, what is being angry with a brother; for he is not angry with a brother who is angry at his offence. He then it is who is angry without cause, who is angry with his brother, and not with the offence. (de Civ. Dei, xiv. 9.) But to be angry with a brother to the end that he may be corrected, there is no man of sound mind who forbids. Such sort of motions as come of love of good and of holy charity, are not to be called vices when they follow right reason. (Serm. in Mont. i. 9.) And there is this same distinction between the first case here put by the Saviour and the second: in the first case there is one thing, the passion; in the second two, anger and speech following thereupon, He who saith to his brother, Raca, is in danger of the council. Some seek the interpretation of this word in the Greek, and think that Raca means ragged, from the Greek ῥάκος, a rag. But more probably it is not a word of any meaning, but a mere sound expressing the passion of the mind, which grammarians call an interjection, such as the cry of pain, 'heu.' (ubi sup.) In the third case are three things; anger, the voice expressive of anger, and a word of reproach, Thou fool. Thus here are three different degrees of sin; in the first when one is angry, but keeps the passion in his heart without giving any sign of it. If again he suffers any sound expressive of the passion to escape him, it is more than had he silently suppressed the rising anger; and if he speaks a word which conveys a direct reproach, it is a yet greater sin. (ubi sup.) Here we have three arraignments, the judgment, the council, and hell-fire, being different stages ascending from the lesser to the greater. For in the judgment there is yet opportunity for defence; to the council belongs the respite of the sentence, what time the judges confer among themselves what sentence ought to be inflicted; in the third, hell-fire, condemnation is certain, and the punishment fixed. Hence is seen what a difference is between the righteousness of the Pharisees and Christ; in the first, murder subjects a man to judgment; in the second, anger alone, which is the least of the three degrees of sin. (ubi sup.) Should any ask what greater punishment is reserved for murder, if evil-speaking is visited with hell-fire? This obliges us to understand, that there are degrees in hell. (ubi sup.) In all these three sentences there are some words understood. In the first indeed, as many copies read without cause, there is nothing to be supplied. In the second, He who saith to his brother, Racha, we must supply the words, without cause; and again, in He who says, Thou fool, two things are understood, to his brother, and, without cause. And this forms the defence of the Apostle, when he calls the Galatians fools, though he considers them his brethren; for he did it not without cause.

How greatly the Lord esteems fraternal love we know from this, for he makes clear that a gift offered to God is not acceptable unless the giver of a gift to his brother puts aside his anger and becomes reconciled to him.Furthermore, we learn that the gifts offered by Cain were rejected by God. He failed to observe charity toward his brother and harbored anger in his heart. Hence, not without good reason does the Lord in the Gospel indicate in many places the prime necessity of fraternal charity when he says, “A new commandment I give you, that you love one another.” And again: “By this will all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” Rightly so, the Lord also spoke through Zechariah: “Render true judgments, show kindness and mercy each to his brother.” Through David he likewise declared: “Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath!”

In speaking of the judgment and of the council and of the Gehenna of fire, Jesus refers to one and the same punishment. He does not indicate various things through the difference of the words, nor some different chastisement. But if it is not permissible to call somebody a fool, why does the Lord himself employ the expression fools? It is not fitting to call one’s particular brother a fool, for such a word issues from anger and not from righteousness. It is even more impious when it is spoken against someone who is holy. But the Lord justly terms as fools people who are in no way righteous and in no way what he is. He does this not out of anger but for the sake of truth. Again, Gehenna is the place of eternal and infernal punishment.

“Whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ shall be liable to the council.” The word raca, my brothers, is not simply an expression but the visceral reaction of a ridiculer as well as an insult. It usually manifests itself by a sidelong glance or a flaring of the nostrils or a rattle in the throat, so that one’s will concocts insults and the extent of the harm done is unknown. But God, who looks at a person’s intentions, sees his desires and judges his feelings, brings the one who is guilty of ridiculing his brother to the council of the holy, because ridicule aimed at one person redounds to the insulting of everyone; the condition of one limb spreads to the body, and the suffering of the body goes up to the head. Thus, as to what a ridiculer has inflicted on his brother, he will realize and regret in the heavenly council that his insight reached up to God.“Whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be liable to the hell of fire.” What the angry man concealed in his heart, what the ridiculer held in his throat, the backbiter has put into words. Thus the expressed insult will be reckoned with in the fire of hell. The judgment for hidden faults depends on the Savior’s decision, so that based on an examination of causes a just judgment is rendered. Clearly then a manifest crime will produce a punishment. But someone may ask, “Just how great is the force of a word, that whoever says to his brother, ‘You fool!’ will be accorded severe punishment?” Very great, my brothers, very great, for Christ is in your brother, and Christ is the wisdom of God. Therefore whoever says to his brother “You fool!” has ridiculed God’s wisdom.

He who is angry without cause shall be judged; but he who is angry with cause shall not be judged. For if there were no anger, neither teaching would profit, nor judgments hold, nor crimes be controlled. So that he who on just cause is not angry, is in sin; for an unreasonable patience sows vices, breeds carelessness, and invites the good as well as the bad to do evil. Yet that anger which arises from just cause is indeed not anger, but a sentence of judgment. For anger properly means a feeling of passion; but he whose anger arises from just cause does not suffer any passion, and is rightly said to sentence, not to be angry with. But I think that Christ does not speak of anger of the flesh, but anger of the heart; for the flesh cannot be so disciplined as not to feel the passion. When then a man is angry but refrains from doing what his anger prompts him, his flesh is angry, but his heart is free from anger. And it were an unworthy reproach to him who has in him the Holy Spirit to call him 'empty.' But as none is empty who has the Holy Spirit, so none is a fool who has the knowledge of Christ; and if Racha signifies 'empty,' it is one and the same thing, as far as the meaning of the word goes, to say Racha, or 'thou fool.' But there is a difference in the meaning of the speaker; for Racha was a word in common use among the Jews, not expressing wrath or hate, but rather in a light careless way expressing confident familiarity, not anger. But you will perhaps say, if Racha is not an expression of wrath, how is it then a sin? Because it is said for contention, not for edification; and if we ought not to speak even good words but for the sake of edification, how much more not such as are in themselves bad? In danger of the council; that is, (according to the interpretation given by the Apostles in their Constitutions,) in danger of being one of that Council which condemned Christe.

A brother asked Poemen, ‘What is the meaning of the text, “Whoever is angry with his brother without a cause” (Matt. 5:22)?’ He answered, ‘If you are angry with your brother for any kind of trouble that he gives you, that is anger without a cause, and it is better to pluck out your right eye and cast it from you. But if anyone wants to separate you from God, then you must be angry with him.’

The Saviour here names the torments of hell, Gehenna, a name thought to be derived from a valley consecrate to idols near Jerusalem, and filled of old with dead bodies, and defiled by Josiah, as we read in the Book of Kings.

But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with His brother without good cause shall be liable to judgement. The prophets, about to prophesy, would say, "Thus saith the Lord," but Christ says, "I say," showing the authority of His divinity. For the prophets were servants; but He is the Son and possesses all that the Father has. He who "is angry with his brother without good cause" is condemned; but if anyone should get angry for good reason, either by way of chastisement or out of spiritual zeal, he is not condemned. For even Paul spoke words of anger to Elymas the Magician and to the high priest, not "without good cause," but out of zeal (Acts 13:6-12 and 23:2-3). But when we get angry over money or opinions, then it is "without good cause." And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be liable to the council. "The council" means the court of the Hebrews. "Raca" means something like "Hey, you!" as when we say to someone whom we scorn, "Hey you, get out of here!" The Lord exhorts us in these matters because He desires to teach us to be strict even in small things and to give honor to one another. Some say that "Raca" is a Syriac word for "despicable" or "scum." Therefore, whoever insults his brother as "despicable" will be liable to the council of the holy apostles when they sit to judge the twelve tribes. But whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be liable to the gehenna of fire. There are many who say and believe that this is too grievous and severe a judgement. But it is not. For is he who would deny the existence of his brother's faculties of reason and thought, those characteristics by which we differ from the beasts, is such a man not deserving of gehenna? For he who reviles and insults, dissolves love; and when love is dissolved, all the virtues are destroyed along with it, just as when love is present it unites to itself all the virtues. Therefore, he who hurls insults, destroys all the virtues by tearing love to shreds, and rightly does he deserve the fire of hell.

THE BEATITUDES, AND THEIR BEARING UPON THE WORLD. (Mat. 5:1-16) And seeing the multitudes--those mentioned in Mat 4:25. he went up into a mountain--one of the dozen mountains which ROBINSON says there are in the vicinity of the Sea of Galilee, any one of them answering about equally well to the occasion. So charming is the whole landscape that the descriptions of it, from JOSEPHUS downwards [Wars of the Jews, 4.10,8], are apt to be thought a little colored. and when he was set--had sat or seated Himself. his disciples came unto him--already a large circle, more or less attracted and subdued by His preaching and miracles, in addition to the smaller band of devoted adherents. Though the latter only answered to the subjects of His kingdom, described in this discourse, there were drawn from time to time into this inner circle souls from the outer one, who, by the power of His matchless word, were constrained to forsake their all for the Lord Jesus.

But I say unto you--Mark the authoritative tone in which--as Himself the Lawgiver and Judge--Christ now gives the true sense, and explains the deep reach, of the commandment. That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca! shall be in danger of the council; but whosoever shall say, Thou fool! shall be in danger of hell-fire--It is unreasonable to deny, as ALEXANDER does, that three degrees of punishment are here meant to be expressed, and to say that it is but a threefold expression of one and the same thing. But Romish expositors greatly err in taking the first two--"the judgment" and "the council"--to refer to degrees of temporal punishment with which lesser sins were to be visited under the Gospel, and only the last--"hell-fire"--to refer to the future life. All three clearly refer to divine retribution, and that alone, for breaches of this commandment; though this is expressed by an allusion to Jewish tribunals. The "judgment," as already explained, was the lowest of these; the "council," or "Sanhedrim,"which sat at Jerusalem--was the highest; while the word used for "hell-fire" contains an allusion to the "valley of the son of Hinnom" (Jos 18:16). In this valley the Jews, when steeped in idolatry, went the length of burning their children to Molech "on the high places of Tophet"--in consequence of which good Josiah defiled it, to prevent the repetition of such abominations (Kg2 23:10); and from that time forward, if we may believe the Jewish writers, a fire was kept burning in it to consume the carrion and all kinds of impurities that collected about the capital. Certain it is, that while the final punishment of the wicked is described in the Old Testament by allusions to this valley of Tophet or Hinnom (Isa 30:33; Isa 66:24), our Lord Himself describes the same by merely quoting these terrific descriptions of the evangelical prophet (Mar 9:43-48). What precise degrees of unholy feeling towards our brothers are indicated by the words "Raca" and "fool" it would be as useless as it is vain to inquire. Every age and every country has its modes of expressing such things; and no doubt our Lord seized on the then current phraseology of unholy disrespect and contempt, merely to express and condemn the different degrees of such feeling when brought out in words, as He had immediately before condemned the feeling itself. In fact, so little are we to make of mere words, apart from the feeling which they express, that as anger is expressly said to have been borne by our Lord towards His enemies though mixed with "grief for the hardness of their hearts" (Mar 3:5), and as the apostle teaches us that there is an anger which is not sinful (Eph 4:26); so in the Epistle of James (Jam 2:20) we find the words, "O vain (or, empty) man"; and our Lord Himself applies the very word "fools" twice in one breath to the blind guides of the people (Mat 23:17, Mat 23:19) --although, in both cases, it is to false reasoners rather than persons that such words are applied. The spirit, then, of the whole statement may be thus given: "For ages ye have been taught that the sixth commandment, for example, is broken only by the murderer, to pass sentence upon whom is the proper business of the recognized tribunals. But I say unto you that it is broken even by causeless anger, which is but hatred in the bud, as hatred is incipient murder (Jo1 3:15); and if by the feelings, much more by those words in which all ill feeling, from the slightest to the most envenomed, are wont to be cast upon a brother: and just as there are gradations in human courts of judicature, and in the sentences which they pronounce according to the degrees of criminality, so will the judicial treatment of all the breakers of this commandment at the divine tribunal be according to their real criminality before the heart-searching Judge." Oh, what holy teaching is this!