This post begins with a brief summary of the next section of the gospel (2:1-3:6), and is followed by today's reading. This content was translated using Gemini.
The Hatred of the Pharisees Toward Jesus (Mk 2:1–3:6)
While the crowds follow Jesus with admiration, the scribes and Pharisees burn with envy and hostility toward Him. They manifest a disposition plainly adverse to the Messianic kingdom. Since the leaders of the people are such—indeed, since they are already advancing to the point of entering into counsel with the Herodians to destroy Jesus—it is hinted by a grim presage that through their perversity the people will finally be reprobed by God after the Messiah is rejected.
By bringing forward these examples, the Evangelist teaches what blessings the Messiah is to bring: namely, the remission of sins, the new covenant, and the abolition of the yoke imposed on the people by the scribes. Furthermore, the divine nature of Christ is demonstrated by the fact that He forgives sins and proves Himself Lord of the Sabbath. Truly, the more He manifests His power and kindness, the more His adversaries are hardened in their obstinacy.
Healing of the Paralytic (Mk 2:1–12)
In the healing of the paralytic, Jesus proves Himself the physician of both soul and body. In an extraordinary way, He also manifests His divine nature by His knowledge of the secrets of hearts and the power proper to Himself to forgive sins. While the crowds give glory to God, the scribes do not return to a better notion of Jesus despite both miracles. The Evangelist thus begins to show how great is the perversity of Jesus' adversaries.
Mk 2:1 After a longer interval of time had passed, Christ returned to Capernaum; Verse 1: And again (cf. 1:21) he entered into Capernaum after some days, di’ hēmerōn; Theophylact: dielthousōn hēmerōn tinōn, "some days having intervened." That a longer span is to be understood is clear from Mk 1:39; therefore Maldonatus rightly rejects the reading of many ancient Latin and some Greek copies: "after eight days"; for after His departure, Jesus was preaching in many synagogues of Galilee; hence it is manifest that not a few Sabbaths had passed in the meantime.
Mk 2:2 That Christ entered the city secretly and hiddenly, perhaps by night (Mald. Jansen), is rendered probable by Mk 1:45 and Verse 2: And it was heard that he was in the house. "But as the sun cannot remain hidden, so neither could the Lord Jesus; for the rumor, though it may have arisen from a few, had already spread through the whole city that Jesus was in the house" (Jansen). That the house of Peter is understood is suggested by Mk1:29 (Mald. Schanz), nor does en oikō without the article stand in the way, as it can be placed in an adverbial manner like oikon, meaning "at home"; therefore it was heard that He was at home.
As soon as the rumor was spread, such a force of men flocked there that not only was the house filled, but even those places around the door could not contain the multitude (Jansen); and many came together, so that there was no room, not even at the door. Clearly from the Greek: "so that they no longer contained (them) not even (in the places) which are at the door." Thus both the whole house was filled and the vestibule also could not hold all those who desired to see and hear Jesus. So great already was the influence of Christ through His doctrine and miracles; and he spoke to them the word, and from Luke 5:17, the power of the Lord was present to heal them.
Mk 2:3 Note that this Verse 2 is proper to Mark and again easily refers back to Peter as a witness, as does the mention in Verse 3 that the paralytic was carried by four. Verse 3: And they come (erchontai), in the present tense the matter is presented as if present and placed before the eyes, bringing to him a paralytic, seized in his limbs, suffering from a resolution of the nerves, who, fixed to a bed, was carried by four.
Mk 2:4: And when they could not offer him to him because of the crowd, or as another reading has it, proseggisai, "could not draw near" to Jesus, they uncovered the roof where he was. Roofs among the Jews were flat, leveled in the form of a courtyard; for the slope of roofs is usually very slight, extending either from the middle or from one side. Houses were also equipped with a ladder on the exterior wall by which one could ascend to the roof. They dispute whether such an ascent was open from the atrium or from the street. Fillion, Weiss, and Wetstein contend for the street, as it seems, while Schegg and Schanz favor the atrium. They uncovered the roof, apestegasan tēn stegēn, they moved away the tiles, or opened the pavement of the roof, which was prepared from heaped and compacted earth, and making an opening, exoryxantes, after they had dug it out—that is, they removed and uncovered as much of the roof as was sufficient.
Some think Christ taught in the atrium; this might seem probable if other things did not stand in the way, because it says in Mk 2:2 that He spoke the word to them after it was narrated that not even the places at the door could contain the crowds. Regarding the uncovering of the roof, they take it to mean the parapet or wall of the roof, which they removed so they could lower the bed. Roofs of houses were indeed surrounded by a parapet or wall to prevent anyone from falling (Deut 22:8), which usually rose as high as a man's chest. However, the explanation that these men demolished this wall to lower the paralytic into the courtyard is contrary to the plain words in both Mark and Luke. Calmet shows the matter can be conceived better: that in the middle space of the roof area there was an opening or window closed with valves opening from above, with lattice added around—these valves were raised when light was to be admitted to the room below. To satisfy the narrative, one must add that the space of the valves was not sufficient and therefore part of the roof also was removed.
They also ask in which room Christ taught. Some say in the upper room (coenaculum), because they lowered him from the roof and because Jews were accustomed to ascend to the upper room when dealing with matters pertaining to religion (Lightfoot, Schanz, Meyer). But it is doubtful whether Peter's house had two stories; it is more probable the house was divided by no story, like most common in the East now (Calmet); further, He could more easily teach the crowds from a lower room. They were accustomed to withdraw to an upper room for the sake of solitude and tranquility (cf. 2 Kings 18:33). Hence, with Calmet, Fillion, and Keil, it must be said that Christ was not in some upper room. Moreover, opening roofs was easy and not so unusual. Josephus narrates that when certain houses were found filled with fugitive soldiers, Herod ordered the roof planks of the houses to be dug up (anaskaptōn) and the men finished off by stones thrown from above.
Krabbatos is a Macedonian word; since grabatus is a sufficiently common word for the Latins, Mark seems to have drawn it from Roman usage. From this effort, it is simultaneously gathered how great a desire they had for healing from Jesus. This expectation impelled them, as Victor says, to do a wonderful thing. They believed with certainty that Jesus was both able and willing to restore health to the wretched man.
<k 2:5: When Jesus had seen their faith, of those carrying him, but certainly of both, the carriers and the sick man (Theophylact, Salmeron, Jansen), he saith to the paralytic: "Son, thy sins are forgiven thee." Teknon ("child")—behold with how great a significance of love Jesus addresses him! "O wonderful humility! He calls a despised and weak man, dissolved in all the joints of his limbs, 'son,' whom the priests would not deign to touch; or rightly 'son' because his sins are forgiven him" (Bede). Jesus shows it is of much greater importance for the sick man that the disease of the soul be healed. It is not improbable it is hinted that the disease was a punishment inflicted for sins, as on another occasion Christ says: "Behold, thou art made whole; sin no more, lest something worse happen to thee" (John 5:14).
Christ forgives sins by His own authority; thus the scribes understand it and ought to have understood it, because He makes no mention as if He were praying to God to forgive or as if the remission of them had been revealed to Him by God; and Christ asserts the same in Mk 2:10. Therefore, Weiss wrongly explains: "Christ announces to the sick man the remission of sins which is now granted to him by God through Him!"—an explanation that both conflicts with the words and especially with the authority which Christ claims for Himself in Mk 2:10.
From the fact that Christ forgives sins, it plainly follows that their faith cannot be referred only to those who carry the sick man. For Salmeron and Jansen rightly observe that corporal health can indeed be conferred on someone and was sometimes conferred by Christ solely in view of another's faith; however, spiritual health, which consists in the remission of sins, cannot be received in adults without their own faith. Thus the matter truly stands in the present order of supernatural providence, and it certainly cannot be said that Christ neglected this order. That the sick man himself was moved before Jesus to a salutary shame and penance by the consciousness of his sins is gathered from the word of Christ in Matt 9:2, "Be of good heart." If therefore some say that by another's faith that man rose saved externally and internally, and that by the merit of others the errors of others are relaxed (Bede, Cat. Aur.), this needs a kind interpretation: namely, that others impetrate from God that grace and faith be given to a person by God, and in that way he arrives at salvation. Saint Ambrose shows the matter is to be so conceived and understood when he writes on Luke 5:20: "Great is the Lord, who forgives by the merit of others, and while He approves some, He relaxes the errors of others. Why should a fellow man not prevail with you, when with the Lord a servant has both the merit of intervening and the right of impetrating? Learn, you who judge, to forgive; learn, you who are sick, to impetrate. If you distrust the pardon of grave sins, employ intercessors, employ the Church which may pray for you, in contemplation of which the Lord may forgive what He might deny to you."
As St. Luke records, there were Pharisees and doctors of the law present (Luke 5:17), scribes from every town of Galilee and Judea and from Jerusalem. They are already being drawn toward the works and authority of Christ among the people, so that they may observe Him insidiously. Truly, from the miracles He had performed, they ought to have learned that He was sent by the Lord; moreover, what testimony the Baptist had rendered concerning Him was known to them. Therefore, their judgment of Jesus was no longer without fault.
Mk 2:6-7: And there were some of the scribes sitting there, and thinking in their hearts: Verse 7: "Why doth this man speak thus?" This "this man" seems to be said with contempt, just as the very form of the question expresses indignation. "He blasphemeth; who can forgive sins, but God only?" By this sentence, the rationale for the charge of blasphemy is simultaneously indicated: namely, that He attributes to Himself that which belongs to God alone. Blasphemy, by which one was made guilty of death and upon hearing which witnesses were required to rend their garments, was committed if anyone cursed the name of God by the name of God itself. So at least it is held from the decrees of the rabbis (cf. Surenhusius IV p. 242; tract. on the Sanhedrin 7, 5) which they derived from Lev 24:15–16.
Jesus, however, immediately provides them with a proof of His higher power when He shows that He knows the secrets of hearts, which in the sacred books is taught to be accessible to God alone; for God alone is called the searcher of hearts and reins, and He alone is said to know the heart of the children of men (1 Kings 8:39; 1 Chron 28:9; Ps 7:10; Jer 17:10). Verse 8: Which Jesus presently knowing in his spirit, that they so thought within themselves. He knew by Himself, "in his spirit"—not by another's, in the manner that prophets could know the thoughts of certain people not by their own spirit but by the divine (Salmeron, Jansen); He knew "by himself," with no other teaching Him (Parr. Fil.). He says to them: "Why do you think these things in your hearts?" "The Pharisees indeed argued against the Lord as a blasphemer; the Lord, however, gave another proof that He was true God, namely that He knew their hearts; for God alone knows what is in the heart of anyone. They, however, even when the thoughts of their hearts were revealed, remain senseless, not conceding that He who knew their hearts was able to forgive sins; He therefore creates and establishes faith by healing the body, that He is able also to heal the soul" (Theophylact). By that which is manifest, He confirms that which cannot be seen.
Mk 2:9: "Which is easier, to say to the paralytic: 'Thy sins are forgiven thee'; or to say: 'Arise, take up thy bed, and walk'?" That is, to say it with the force and efficacy of the work, so that the very speech is the effecting. To forgive sins certainly belongs to a higher order; but since the effect of remission is not seen outwardly, while the effect of healing is immediately visible to the eyes, the miracle of healing is a fit means by which Christ proves that even the prior words did not lack effect. Theophylact explains Christ’s manner of speaking thus: perhaps the scribes were thinking such things as, "Behold an impostor; he has omitted to cure the body which is in the manifest and heals the invisible soul; if he could heal the body, he would not take refuge in that which cannot be seen." Jansen rejects this rationale; he himself conceives it thus: "You think me a blasphemer because you judge me to claim power proper to God; but I require your judgment: which of these two is of greater power—to say seriously and with efficacy 'thy sins are forgiven thee,' or to say 'arise and walk'? I do not doubt that both are of equal, indeed of the same power, and that divine, since it is of God alone to provide by His word whatever He wills; therefore, He who presumes to say the latter seriously arrogates to Himself the same power as He who says 'thy sins are forgiven thee,' so that He who says the former is as much a blasphemer as He who says the latter. This much is the difference: that from the observed effect itself following, it can be clearly detected that the power was not falsely and arrogantly claimed, if one says 'arise and walk.'"
Mk 2:10-11 Therefore, He proves the truth of the word regarding remission by the efficacy of His word in effecting the healing of the body. Verse 10: "But that you may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins," (he saith to the paralytic): Verse 11: "I say to thee, Arise, take up thy bed, and go into thy house." To the scribes and doctors of the law, He further hints at who He is when He calls Himself the "Son of Man," an appellation known from the prophet Daniel (Dan 7:13–15), by which He declares Himself the one to whom God will give power and honor and a kingdom, and whom all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve (cf. Comm. on Matt 9:6). He commands him to take up the bed to declare that He has not only healed him but has also infused strength into him (Theophylact, Salmeron).
Mk 2:12 How powerful the word of Christ is is exhibited by the fact itself. Verse 12: And immediately he arose; and taking up his bed, went his way in the sight of all. The health is sudden, because it was "immediately"; complete, because he who was dissolved through all his joints arose consolidated; vigorous, because having taken up the bed he departed; open or manifest, because he departed "in the sight of all" (Alber). And the fruit exists among the crowds, as Matthew indicates (Mt 9:8); and in the same way understand: so that all wondered, and glorified God, saying: "We never saw the like." Hōste existasthai says more than just "wondered"—they were astonished and as if outside themselves (Erasmus). This greatest admiration by which they are struck is not sterile, but brings forth fruit, so that they openly announce the glory and praise of God. That the scribes were not to be numbered among these is evident from the fact that in subsequent passages enough numerous and open examples and proofs of their inveterate malice are found.
Stunned, they cry out: "We never saw the like; never has such a sight been offered to us." The words are obvious, nor is there a need to supply anything further (cf. Schegg), as if Christ's prior works were being compared with this miracle. Various things regarding pious application and the collection of life lessons are provided by Theophylact, Bede, Salmeron, and Schegg.
St. Peter Damian explains the order in which these four miracles follow one another mystically: "Which order, if weighed with diligent care, manifestly teaches with how great an art of mastery the Holy Spirit held the pen of the writer, and dispensed all things as if along a certain line to declare the mystery of human redemption." For in the fall of the first man, the devil spoke in the beginning; then the woman, through the concupiscence of pleasure, incurred as it were the heat of a burning fever; Adam, however, was suffused with the leprosy of vices and held fast by languor as if a paralytic from good works. But the Son of God destroyed the works of the devil by the same path: "inasmuch as He would compel the devil, who had spoken for our ruin, to be silent now, and would free Eve from the fevers of burning concupiscence; and would not only wipe away from the man the leprosy of vices and crimes, but would also loosen the same man, hitherto a paralytic, to be strong and free for exercising works of piety. Just as, therefore, in those men the whole human race perished, so in these healed by the Savior, by the mystery of the superior figure, it is restored to its pristine health" (Collectanea from the New Testament; M. 115, 897).
Comments
Post a Comment