addressed this word exclusively to the Pharisees and to the Sadducees, or whether the curiosity which led the people to desire a heavenly sign was mingled with Pharisaical malignity-"You hypocrites! you know how to discern the face of the heaven and of the earth; but how is it that you do not discern this time, and why, even of yourselves, do you not judge that which is just ?"

It is easy to see the tendency of this discourse. All the signs marked out by the prophets for the coming of the Messiah had appeared, or were actually appearing: the sceptre of Juda had passed away to strangers; they were just at the close of the seventy weeks foretold by Daniel. The Messiah cometh, said a simple woman of Samaria. So notorious was the fact. Therefore, the time was come; and nothing remained but to know who it was that they should acknowledge. The miracles of Jesus Christ clearly designated him, not only by the general evidence which ever results from miraculous deeds, but also because the particular species of miracles had been foretold, as constituting one of the characters of the Messiah, as he himself observed to the disciples of John. Now to say, after this, We will not recognize you, unless you show us some sign from heaven, if in jest, is an insult; if seriously spoken, it can only signify a decided and fixed design to believe nothing. So criminal a disposition caused the Saviour both grief and indignation: (a)" and sighing deeply in spirit, he saith: Why doth this generation ask a sign?" Afterwards, as if he had answered to himself internally that the motive which induced them to ask it rendered them unworthy of seeing it, he presently adds: "A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; but, amen, I say to you, a sign shall not be given it but the sign of Jonas (7) the prophet. Jesus, leaving them, went away again up into the ship, and passed to the other side of the water. When his disciples were come over the water, they had forgotten to take bread; and they had but one loaf with them in the ship. Jesus said to them, and charged them: Take

(a) St. Mark, viii. 12-15; St. Matthew, xvi. 4-6.

(7) That of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, figured by the egress of Jonas from the belly of the whale, wherein he had been inclosed during three days. Jesus Christ had already proposed this sign on an occasion similar to this.

heed, and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and of the leaven of Herod (8)." This word leaven, which they took in its literal meaning, reminded them that they had not thought of laying in a store of bread. Whereupon they were filled with anxiety; for they were frequently on the borders of desert places, where it was impossible to procure it. (a) “And they reasoned among themselves, saying: We have taken no bread." Perhaps they had already proceeded to the length of mutual censure, which is reciprocally dealt out by parties who have committed a common fault, when "Jesus, knowing" their embarrassment, which they did not dare to discover to him, he went on to show them the considerably greater fault which they had then committed. "O ye of little faith, he saith to them, why do you think within yourselves that you have no bread? Do you not yet know nor understand? Have you still your hearts blinded? Having eyes, see you not; and having ears, hear you not? Neither do you remember, when I broke the five loaves among five thousand, how many baskets full of frag

(a) St. Mark, viii. 16-20; St. Matthew, xvi. 8.

“O

(8) Saint Mark, who omits the Sadducees named by Saint Matthew, adds to the leaven of the Pharisees, that of Herod, or of the Herodians, of whom mention is made, page 113, and note 4 of chapter xv. Nothing is there said of their opinions, regarding which there is no settled information. Nevertheless, it has been conjectured that they may not have been different from the Sadducees. Here are the grounds of this conjecture: In all likelihood, the Herodians were only so denominated, on account of their attachment for the family of the Herods, who were the princes of the country. The Herodians were, therefore, men connected with the court, or courtiers. Now Josephus, Book II. of the Jewish War, chapter vii., states, that the sect of Sadducees was but little diffused, but that it was the sect of the aristocracy. On the other hand, we learn from the Gospel that the Sadducees were pure materialists, who not only denied the resurrection, but who did not acknowledge that any spiritual substance existed in the universe. Here, then, we have in this aristocracy the condition, as well as in this materialism the religion, of many courtiers; therefore, if we like to draw the conclusion, the Sadducees were Herodians. If it be further inquired, whether these amongst the aristocracy were men who joined themselves to the Pharisees, in order to put captious questions to the Saviour, it is not only possible that some amongst them may have done so, but we may answer, moreover, that the aristocracy were not the only members who composed the sect of the Sadducees. They were, indeed, the heads of it; but we may also presume that Sadduceeism was the religion of their clients, their parasites, and their servants, not to speak of those who, not having it in their power to equal them in riches, may have wished to resemble them by dissoluteness of mind and morals.

ments you took up ? They say to him: Twelve. When, also, the seven loaves among four thousand, how many baskets of fragments took you up? They say to him: Seven."

This was sufficient to make them ashamed of their embarrassment. But if they were not to be anxious about bread after the two miracles of which they had just been witnesses and co-operators, Jesus Christ, the author of these miracles, whose arm was not shortened, was still less disposed to think of such things. They should, therefore, when he spoke of leaven, have understood it in a sense different from what the word usually presents to the mind. This is what he made them remark: "He said to them [when terminating this conversation]: Why do you not yet understand that it was not concerning bread I said to you: Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees? Then [at last] they understood that he said not that they should beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees (9).”

(9) Jesus Christ said elsewhere: The Scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses; all things, therefore, whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do; thus openly authorizing their doctrine, which is, nevertheless, condemned here. This shows that discrimination should be used between the doctrine of Moses, when the Pharisees expounded it, and their own particular doctrines, when they proposed them. It was incumbent on the hearer to receive the first, and to reject the others. All this is signified by the words of the Saviour-Beware, which doth not mean to convey: Reject all that they say, or close your ears, lest you should hear them; but listen to them with precaution and discernment. Those who shall say that this discernment was a difficult and anxious thing, shall recognize a truth which must make known to them, at the same time, the obligation which they owe to God for having spared them the trouble and the dangers. For when the Church instructs us by means of those whom God hath established her chief pastors, all is pure and sound, and should be received without distrust. Hence there is no reason for reading the works of heretics, saying that the reader profits by what is good, and passes over what is bad; for people are to be found, who deem themselves authorized to do so, by the permission which Jesus Christ grants to hear the Pharisees when using this discrimination. This was profitable to the Jews, who had no other teachers; but we who have others, teaching truth pure and unalloyed, why should we perplex ourselves, by fishing out truth from amid a thousand errors, at the risk of still falling into mistake? There is no imprudence in availing ourselves of a bad guide, when we have no other, and that we must have one; but when we have found one who is a sure guide, to leave him, for the purpose of taking another guide who may mislead us, because he also may not go astray, is not merely temerity, but extravagance.

CHAPTER XXIX.

THE BLIND MAN OF BETHSAIDA.-CONFESSION OF SAINT PETER.-PROMISE OF THE KEYS.-PASSION FORETOLD.-PETER REBUKED.-SELF IS TO BE RENOUNCED.THE CROSS MUST BE CARRIED.

(a) "[From the place where they disembarked] they came to Bethsaida, where they bring to Jesus a blind man, and they besought him that he would touch him." As this was one of those miracles which he did not wish to make public, "taking the blind man by the hand, he led him out of the town; and spitting upon his eyes, laying his hands on him, he asked him if he saw any thing. The blind man looking up, said: I see men as it were trees walking." This answer shows us that he was not born blind, since he had a distinct idea of men and trees. "After that again, Jesus laid his hands upon his eyes, and he began to see [better], and was restored, so that he saw all things clearly. After that, Jesus sent him into his house. Go into thy house, he said, and if thou enter into the town (1), tell nobody (2)."

This is a remarkable cure, being the only one which Jesus wrought by degrees. It is commonly attributed to the disposition of the blind man, whose faith, at first feeble, only attained for him an imperfect cure, subsequently perfected with his faith, so that he did not

(a) St. Mark, viii. 22-27.

(1) The borough of Bethsaida is also called city by Saint John. It was one of that middle class of places which may receive either one or the other appellation.

(2) Was it simply in order that the miracle should remain a secret in the country, that Jesus Christ forbid the blind man to speak of it in Bethsaida, or did he wish to conceal the knowledge thereof from the inhabitants, in order to punish them for the little fruit which they had derived from the great number of miracles which he had wrought amongst them? this is a matter of uncertainty. The second conjecture is usually grounded upon these words of the Saviour, St. Luke, x. 13: Woe to thee, Corozain! woe to thee, Bethsaida! for if in Tyre and Sidon had been wrought the mighty works that have been wrought in you, they would have done penance long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. See note 14, chap. xxii., p. 178; the contempt of miracles punished by the cessation of miracles.

see clearly but when he believed firmly. Thus, Peter walked upon the waters when he believed without hesitating; and when he commenced to doubt, so also he commenced to sink. Certain it is, and we think we have already said so, that miracles usually follow faith, and proportion themselves to it. Nevertheless, the Saviour may have had other reasons for pursuing the course he adopted on this occasion. One is, for example, that he wished to draw a picture of the sometimes slow and gradual advances of his grace, which, when it makes the soul pass from darkness to light, has, if we may venture to speak, its twilight and its aurora. Happy he who is not disheartened at its lingering approach, who knows how to take advantage of its first rays, and to quicken, by an increase of faith, the bursting of its full dawn.

(a) "From Bethsaida Jesus went out with his disciples into the towns in the quarters of Cesarea Philippi (3). In the way, as he was alone praying," that is to say, apart from the crowd, or without being followed by it, for "his disciples also were with him," he asked them, saying: "Whom do men say that the Son of man is?" It seems that the prejudices of the people as to who Jesus might be were not different from those of Herod and his court, since "they said: Some, John the Baptist;, some say, Elias, and others, Jeremias ; others say that one of the former prophets is risen again (4). Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered, and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God (5). Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona; because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father

(a) St. Matthew, xvi. 13-19; St. Luke, ix. 18-21; St. Mark, viii. 27–29.

(3) Previously Paneas, but called Cesarea by Philip the tetrarch, who wished to court favor with the Emperor Tiberias. The surname of Philip has been given to it, in order to distinguish it from another Cesarea, rebuilt and magnificently embellished by Herod the Great, in honor of the Emperor Augustus. This latter city, which was situated on the borders of the Mediterranean, was previously called the Tower of Straton.

(4) Or perhaps because the soul of some of these great men had passed into his body; for a belief in the transmigration of souls was current among the Jews, as appears by the books of their Talmudists and their Cabalists.

(5) More than were John the Baptist, Elias, Jeremy, and the prophets; therefore move than by adoption; therefore by nature.