Translated by Qwen.

Father Joseph Knabenbauer's Commentary on Matthew 21:1-11

On the Triumphant Entry into the City

In His triumphant entry into the city, Jesus openly proclaims Himself as the Messiah, and as such is greeted by the crowd. Here, therefore—as St. Thomas says—the glory of Christ is at issue. The leaders and princes were expecting a glorious Messiah and conqueror; Jesus presents Himself to them as such on this occasion, yet they reject Him, whereby their greater obstinacy is also revealed. Jesus reveals Himself more clearly; as St. Chrysostom notes, He offers a certain specimen of His kingdom and proves Himself to be the Messiah. At the same time, through this very triumph, He clearly indicates the character and nature of His kingdom, in that He displays His royal dignity and magnificence in such a way that He nevertheless does not abandon the utmost humility and meekness.

Thus, a few days before He would be led to execution as a false messiah, He enters the city with such a demonstration of His dignity that He is greeted by the crowds as the true Christ of God, that longed-for and expected King of Israel. Consequently, no one could complain that this dignity of Jesus was unknown to them. For after the testimonies of John the Baptist, after so many miracles of Jesus and His declarations concerning Himself and His mission from the Father, when this solemn manifestation of His dignity was added, what person of sound mind could hesitate regarding whom Jesus professed and proved Himself to be?

Yet it is equally certain that the princes of the synagogue and leaders of the people—the priests and Pharisees—were provoked by this glory of His to greater anger and envy (St. Thomas), and were inflamed to bring death upon Him (Jansenius, Lapide).

On the Date and Its Symbolic Significance

It is a fairly common opinion that Jesus entered the city in solemn manner on the first day of the week and on the 10th day of the month Nisan (cf. Jansenius, Lapide, Lamy, Reischl, Bisping, Schanz, Fillion, Wieseler, Chronologische Synopse, p. 391; Beiträge, p. 264; Keil, Keim, Mansel, Ed.). Nor is this day without significance: for on the tenth day of Nisan, the Israelites were commanded that each should choose a paschal lamb (Exodus 12:3) and set it apart for sacrifice on the 14th day. Jesus, therefore—the true Paschal Lamb, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world—entered the city on the very day on which the paschal lamb was designated and customarily adorned (cf. Jansenius, Lapide). Accordingly, in this matter too, He expressed in Himself the type of the paschal lamb.

Furthermore, on this day—the first day of the week—He wished to enter the city as a victorious king with palm branches, since on the same day, after the completion of a week, having conquered death, He was to rise again gloriously and inaugurate His glorious kingdom. The tenth day of the first month was also once notable because on that day Joshua—bearing a type of Christ even in the similarity of His name—entered the promised land with the whole people after crossing the Jordan (Joshua 4:19; Jansenius).

This opinion—that Palm Sunday fell on the tenth day of Nisan, the first day of the week—is sufficiently confirmed from the Gospels themselves. From John 12:1 we learn that Jesus came to Bethany six days before the Passover. Now, the 14th of Nisan, on which, according to the law's precept, the paschal lamb was to be sacrificed—and on which therefore the Passover was celebrated—can be called "the Passover," so that the sixth day before the Passover is the sixth day before the day of the immolation of the paschal lamb. And this interpretation of "of the Passover" is commended from John's Gospel itself, for wherever he makes mention of the solemn day itself, he commemorates "the feast of the Passover" (13:1). Add to this that already in Numbers 33:3 the fifteenth day of the first month is called "the morrow after the Passover," the day after the phase [pasch], and in the same way in Joshua 5:11; and since in Leviticus 23:5 it is said that on the fourteenth day of the month at evening is the phase [pasch], the Passover of the Lord—which is likewise in Numbers 28:16 and Ezekiel 45:21—it is easily explained why the 14th day could be called by the name of Passover. And indeed Josephus also calls the 14th of Nisan "the day of the Passover," for he writes: "The fifteenth [day] follows the day of the Passover, which is the feast of unleavened bread" (Antiquities 3.10.5). It is also certain that St. Justin and others designate the fourteenth day by the name "Passover."

Now from the narrative of the Synoptics it is evident that the first day of unleavened bread, on which the Passover was to be sacrificed—that is, the 14th of Nisan—fell on the fifth day of the week (Thursday). Therefore, "six days before" designates the sixth day before the 14th of Nisan, that is, the eighth day of the same month, which fell on the sixth day of the week (Friday). Jesus therefore came to Bethany on Friday; and if that phrase "of the Passover" in John 12:1 indicates the time of the immolation, [He came] Friday afternoon toward evening; He remained there on the Sabbath, and a meal was prepared for Him, just as the Jews generally used to hold solemn banquets on Sabbaths; and on the tenth of Nisan, the first day of the week, on the day after the meal (John 12:12), He entered the city solemnly. See also Grimm, V, pp. 350, 368.

The same time is also gathered from the narration of Mark and Matthew. For what Mark narrates (11:1-11) pertains to the day of the entry; what follows (11:12-19) to the day after the entry; and what follows (11:20–14:1) to the second day after the entry. Now on that day Christ says: "You know that after two days the Passover takes place, and the Feast of Unleavened Bread" (cf. Matthew 26:2; Mark 14:1). But the Passover and Unleavened Bread were on the fifth day of the week [Thursday]; therefore those words were spoken on the third day of the week [Tuesday], and the entry into the city again falls on the first day of the week, the 10th of Nisan. Therefore, we can safely acquiesce in that opinion, which is moreover strongly commended by the symbolic significance that follows from this chronological arrangement.

Rightly, therefore, does the Church, just as she commemorates the death of the Lord on Friday, so celebrate Palm Sunday on the Lord's Day, and the following Sunday the day of the glorious resurrection.

On the Location: Bethany and Bethphage

Mt 21:1 Just as the Synoptics omit many other things, so also here they omit reporting that Jesus stayed in Bethany, which John (12:1ff.) narrates. Now Bethany was about fifteen stadia distant from the city (John 11:18). From this village Jesus set out for the triumphal entry. How He prepared this, the evangelist narrates in verse 1: "And when they drew near to Jerusalem and came to Bethphage, to the Mount of Olives."

According to the Talmudists, Bethphage was situated near Jerusalem, indeed at times was reckoned as part of the city itself, so that only one who was outside the walls was said to be "outside Jerusalem" at Bethphage (cf. Lightfoot, Centuria chorographica, cap. 37, vol. 2, p. 198ff.; Wünsche, p. 240). The name is commonly explained as "house of unripe figs" or "house of figs" (cf. Lightfoot, ibid.; Buxtorf, Lexicon Chaldaicum, p. 1691; Schanz, Keil, Weiss), with which the Mount of Olives was not a little renowned; for although it took its name from olives, it also produced figs and palms (Lightfoot, ibid.).

The Mount of Olives lay toward the east, five stadia from the city, as Josephus says (Antiquities 20.6); now indeed in Acts 1:12 it is said to be a Sabbath day's journey from the city, which journey comprises eight stadia. Yet Luke does not contradict Josephus: for the latter measures the distance to the first base of the Olivet, while the former [measures] to the place on the Olivet where the Savior ascended. The first foot of the mountain was five stadia from the city; but Christ, about to ascend the mountain, climbed further for three stadia (Lightfoot, ibid., cap. 40, p. 201).

However, other explanations have also been proposed. In the Onomasticon Sacrum (ed. de Lagarde, 173.58; 182.94; 201.50), Βηθφαγή is explained as οἶκος ἐπιτυχίας ("house of meeting"), as if a place of encounter (עגפ); perhaps a place where several roads converge—to which explanation corresponds what is found in the Thesaurus Syriacus (ed. Payne Smith, p. 493): besides the common explanation "house of figs," also "place of cypress herb," and another is added: "bivium" (a fork in the road), which is cited from Jesus bar Ali's Lexicon Syro-Arabicum. Furthermore, in the Onomasticon (ibid.) another interpretation is offered: οἶκος στόματος ἢ φάραγγος ("house of mouth or of ravine"), which is found in similar fashion in the Thesaurus Syriacus (ibid.), and to which seems to correspond in part what קמע in Genesis 14:7 is rendered by the Talmudists as אגפומ (cf. Lightfoot, ibid.).

In Origen we read: "We say it is to be interpreted 'house of jaws,' which was a villa of the priests" (M 13.1429). The same interpretation was adopted by St. Jerome, whose interpretation Buxtorf (Lexicon Chaldaicum, p. 1692) derives from the Syriac word אכַּכּ "maxilla" (jaw). Others have explained it as "house of the fountain" from the word יגיפ, which Hellenizing Jews formed from the Greek πηγή. Origen explains the word "Bethany" as "house of obedience," which explanation is also found in St. Jerome, Bede, Rabanus, Paschasius, etc. Recent scholars derive the word variously: Lightfoot (ibid., p. 202) explains תיב וניה as "house of dates"; others [explain] תיב הינע as "place of depression" or "house of misery." Today the village is called el-Azariyeh, a name taken from Lazarus, as if "Lazarium."

On the Sending of the Two Disciples

In such great proximity to the city, therefore, Jesus prepares His entry. Then Jesus sent two disciples—the evangelist inserting "then" with emphasis seems to call our attention to the grave time that is at hand. Some inquire who these disciples sent were. As in Luke 22:8, so here it is conjectured that Peter and John may be understood (Jansenius, Lapide, Ed.); Peter and Philip, according to St. Ambrose, Bede, Rabanus, and others, for a mystical reason: since they considered that the Jews were designated in the she-ass, and the Gentiles in the colt, they opined that in these two disciples were prefigured Peter's apostolate to the circumcision and Paul's to the Gentiles (cf. Origen, Jerome, Theophylact, Paschasius). But it is better to say with Maldonatus: "Who those two disciples were, it is the part of a prudent interpreter not to inquire; of a prudent reader, willingly to be ignorant, since the evangelists have not expressed it—doubtless they would have expressed it if they had judged it to be of any interest to us."

Mt 21:2 He sends them (v. 2), saying to them: "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to Me." It is explicitly stated that Jesus Himself arranged that procession; for He who until then had completed all journeys on foot, in the closest proximity to the great city, for the first time sends [others]. Why? Already He indicates that He wishes to enter the city in solemn manner, and in no way does this agree with the narration that some have dreamed—that Jesus merely yielded to the ardent zeal and desire of His companions, who wished publicly to demonstrate their admiration for Jesus by such a procession (Neander, de Wette, Weizsäcker). By the very command, Jesus shows that He knows hidden and distant things.

Mt 21:3 Likewise (v. 3): "And if anyone says anything to you"—namely, 'What are you doing, untying the colt? Why do you untie it?' (cf. Mark 11:5; Luke 19:31, 33)—"say, 'The Lord has need of them,' and immediately he will send them." As is narrated to have happened in Mark 11:6 and Luke 19:34. Matthew briefly summarizes the matter in verse 6. Jesus proves Himself not only foreknowing of future things, but also Lord of souls, who will incline the hearts of men whithersoever He wills (Proverbs 21:1).

On the Fulfillment of Prophecy

Mt 21:4-5 That Jesus fulfilled the prophetic oracle by this event, and that in that procession He demonstrated Himself to all by the very fact as Messiah and wished to be truly recognized as Messiah by the fulfillment of that oracle—the evangelist explicitly declares by citing the prophecy, which the other Synoptics do not do:

"Now all this took place that what was spoken through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying: 'Say to the daughter of Zion: Behold, your king comes to you, meek, and sitting upon a donkey, and a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.'" (vv. 4-5)

That phrase "Say to the daughter of Zion" is not found in Zechariah, but in Isaiah 62:11, where likewise there is discourse concerning the coming of the Savior: "Say to the daughter of Zion: Behold, your Savior comes." Whence it is also explained why in some manuscripts it is read with the addition "through Isaiah" (cf. textual variants). There are those who think that the evangelist truly conflated those two oracles, Isaiah 62:11 and Zechariah 9:9, into one—which sacred authors of the New Testament sometimes do.

The very words of Zechariah are cited in such a way that the sense of the oracle is faithfully expressed, yet it is not altogether accurately transcribed, whether from the Hebrew text or the Alexandrian version. Concerning the Hebrew text, see what I have said in my commentary on that passage (Prophetae Minores II, p. 319ff.).

Zechariah's oracle begins with an exhortation to joy and gladness: "Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem!" It is solemn to designate the inhabitants of a city, its dwelling-place, by the metaphor "daughter of the city." "Behold, your king will come to you"—yours, namely, long since promised, who alone after the rejection of Zedekiah is to be expected from Ezekiel's prophecy, the king to whom belongs the right of the kingdom, and to whom Yahweh will give it (Ezekiel 21:27). "He will come to you"—for you, for your benefit, that He may save you and fill you with goods, just as similarly in Isaiah 9:6: "A child is born to us, a son is given to us."

There follows in the oracle: "just and saving" (σῴζων, so the LXX; similarly the Syriac, Chaldean; Hebrew עני, "saved"), which words Matthew does not retain. Furthermore, the King of Israel, the Messiah, is described as πραΰς ("meek"), neither having attendants nor those bearing lance, sword, or fasces, but exhibiting much gentleness and humanity (Euthymius; Hebrew עני, "poor, meek, mild, modest," Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 1050)—which character He displays in the very procession, while He is not carried on a war-horse, but "sitting upon a donkey, and a colt, the foal of a beast of burden" (LXX: ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον; Hebrew: "ascending upon a donkey"). The word חמור commonly designates a donkey; once (2 Samuel 19:27) the feminine gender is used; and "colt, foal of a she-ass" is usually explained in the Greek version by ὑποζύγιον.

In the context of Zechariah's discourse there is an excellent opposition between the proud conqueror and bloodthirsty warrior on the one hand, and the Messiah, the peaceful and meek king, on the other. Therefore the King Messiah is described as not driving a chariot like other kings, not exacting tribute, not striking terror and leading about attendants, but showing modesty—hence also that He is carried on a donkey, exhibiting great [humility] (St. Chrysostom). For it is a symbol of peace, meekness, humility, that He conducts His procession carried on a donkey. And the prophet especially adumbrates this character of the King Messiah by that image.

Moreover, it pleased Divine Providence that, so that there might stand forth for all an argument most easy and efficacious, that oracle was fulfilled word for word, so that in Jesus the Jews might perceive [the Messiah]. That the Jews understood Zechariah's oracle concerning the King Messiah is altogether certain. This indeed is evident from very many passages of the Talmudic and rabbinic writers, which Raymundus Martinus collected in his work Pugio Fidei adversus Mauros et Iudaeos, p. 3, dist. 3, cap. 16; and Galatinus, De Arcanis Catholicae Veritatis, lib. 8, cap. 9-10, §6; Lightfoot on this passage of Matthew; likewise Wetstein, Schoettgen, Horae Hebraicae I, p. 169; II, pp. 101-104, 139-169, etc.; Reinke, Messianische Weissagungen IV, pp. 115-119.

It suffices to bring forward a few examples. Wetstein notes: "The Jews explain Zechariah's saying concerning the Messiah with great consensus." Rabbi Solomon: "This cannot be expounded except concerning the King Messiah." Rabbi Saadias Gaon on Daniel 7:13: "Is it not written concerning the Messiah: 'humble and riding upon a donkey'?" Sanhedrin, fol. 98,1: "King Sapor of Persia said to Samuel: 'You say that the Messiah will come riding on a donkey; I will send Him a variegated horse which I have,'" etc. (cf. Bochart, Hierozoicon I, lib. 2, cap. 17).

On the Disciples' Obedience and the Animals

Mt 21:6-7 The disciples carry out the commands (v. 6): "And the disciples going, did just as Jesus commanded them." (v. 7) "And they brought the donkey and the colt, and placed their garments upon them, and He sat upon them." They did not know, namely, on which animal He wished or it was fitting to use; or [they thought] it was proper that both animals proceed in such a procession with some ornament; therefore, in place of trappings and saddle-cloths and saddles, they placed τὰ ἱμάτια, that is, their mantles, outer garments (cf. Hebrew שלח), "and they made Him sit upon them." In Greek: "and He sat upon them," namely, upon the garments, as most interpreters with Theophylact, Euthymius, Caietan understand; nor does Schegg's objection hold weight—that it is too evident that the Lord would not sit beside or below the garments, and therefore "upon them" must be referred to the animals.

As in many other descriptions, each detail, even minute ones, is designated. Which explanation is more obvious and easy than the alternative: to take the plural number by way of synecdoche or enallage of number, whereby what befits one of several is indefinitely attributed to them all—examples of which are found, e.g., in Genesis 8:4; Matthew 26:8; 27:44 (Lamy). For it is certain from the other three narratives, in which only the colt is mentioned (Mark 11:7; Luke 19:35; John 12:14), that Christ was carried only on the colt; and this the far greater number of interpreters also maintain in explaining this passage of Matthew (cf. Euthymius, Barradius, Jansenius, Maldonatus, Tostatus, q. 17, Calmet, Lamy, Arnoldi, Bisping, Schegg, Schanz, Fillion).

The reason, moreover, why the donkey was also brought is easily found: for the colt was still untamed and not accustomed to labor (cf. Mark 11:2); therefore its mother is brought with it, following whom and with whom as companion it was accustomed to proceed quietly and in order; but separated from its mother, such a colt is difficult to guide and does not proceed in a quiet manner. Christ therefore wished to employ a natural aid in this matter too, and not to direct the younger colt in some supernatural or miraculous manner.

Moreover, He chose a colt upon which no man had yet sat. For first-fruits are to be consecrated to God; and it is fitting that an animal serve Christ which has not yet performed other services—just as by law it is prescribed that animals be employed for sacred purposes which have not yet borne a yoke nor undergone labor (cf. Numbers 19:2; Deuteronomy 21:3; 1 Kings 6:7).

On Symbolic Interpretations of the Two Animals

Why Jesus ordered both animals to be brought to Him, many explain symbolically, and usually in such a way that in the donkey, which has already borne a yoke, is represented the Jewish people; in the colt, however, wanton and free (St. Jerome), the nations of the Gentiles: that both animals are brought, and this is the prophecy and to the synagogue and to the Gentiles salvation is offered by Christ. So already St. Justin (Dialogue with Trypho, cap. 53); Origen: that both synagogue and Gentiles had been bound by sins, but through Christ's disciples both peoples ought to be loosed and led to Christ. Similarly St. Chrysostom: that by the colt is signified the Church, a new people, once impure, but after Jesus has sat upon it, made pure; that the disciples loose the subjugals because through the apostles both believing Jews and we who are called [Gentiles] are summoned. In similar fashion: St. Jerome (Opus Imperfectum), Bede, Rabanus, Paschasius, Barradius, St. Thomas, Tostatus, q. 17.

By this symbolic explanation, others also support the opinion that Christ was carried successively on both the donkey and the colt (cf. Theophylact, Barradius, Caietan, Dionysius, Lapide, Sylveira)—which sentiment is rejected by the other three narratives, as has already been said above. Nor is it commended in any way by Matthew's words, nor can it be gathered from Zechariah's oracle. For in that oracle, "upon a donkey and a colt, the foal of a she-ass" can most easily be taken so that "and" is exegetical: "upon a donkey, and indeed upon a colt"—by which locution nothing new is added to the prior word, but the general designation is determined and circumscribed in a certain definite way. Which mode of the particle "and" is frequently observed (see my commentary in Prophetae Minores II, p. 321).

Besides that fairly common interpretation of the animals, others have also been proposed. St. Hilary sees in the donkey Samaria figuratively represented, obsessed by alien and foreign dominion, which through the apostles is loosed and restored to its Lord; by the new, stubborn, hard colt, all the vices of Gentile ignorance. Otherwise, again, St. Ambrose: "Because in two persons each sex had been expelled, in two animals each sex is recalled; therefore there in the mother donkey, as it were, he figured Eve; here however in the colt he expressed the generality of the Gentile people; and therefore one sits on the colt, [while] the donkey [is led]" (On Luke, lib. 9, n. 4; M 15.1794).

On the Historical Custom of Riding Donkeys

In ancient times it was the custom of nobles to ride on donkeys: thus Abraham (Genesis 22:3), Moses (Exodus 4:20), Balaam (Numbers 22:21); in the Song of Deborah the princes of Israel are described as "you who ride on bright donkeys" (Judges 5:10); concerning the judge Jair it is read: "having thirty sons riding on thirty colts of donkeys" (Judges 10:4; cf. 12:14). Later, in the time of the kings, the custom of breeding horses prevailed more (cf. 1 Kings 4:26; 10:28; 2 Chronicles 1:28, etc.); nevertheless, it was never vile or shameful to ride on donkeys. It is well known that these animals in eastern regions are much more spirited and of more eminent form than in our regions; whence, for example, it is praised that Issachar is called "a strong donkey" (Genesis 49:14).

From our passage, the significance must be gathered from Zechariah's prophecy—that is, from the opposition to the bellicose conqueror—and from the added words; moreover, by this very triumphal entry which takes place upon the colt of a donkey, it is sufficiently declared that Jesus in no way by force and arms was about to establish a temporal kingdom, nor would He offer Himself as a leader for a military expedition by which the Romans would be expelled from Palestine—which very thing most of the Jews were expecting from the Messiah, as is clearly stated in Psalm 17 from those [psalms] which are called Solomon's.

Jesus also shows His royal and divine majesty and power, by which He can rule and incline souls whithersoever He wills, even by this: that suddenly, without any word or other sign, He excites in the crowd the greatest zeal for honoring Him and preparing a triumphal procession for Himself.

On the Crowd's Acclamation

Mt 21:8 "And a very great crowd spread their garments in the way." Thus of old also they honored Jehu after they heard: "Thus says the Lord: I have anointed you king over Israel"; and they hastened, and each one, taking his garment, placed [it] under his feet (2 Kings 9:12-13). "And others cut branches from the trees and strewed them in the way," as was accustomed to be done in solemn processions (cf. 1 Maccabees 13:51: "They entered into the citadel with praise and palm branches"; and 2 Maccabees 10:7: "They carried thyrsi and green branches and palms before him" [Judas Maccabeus, who prospered to cleanse his place]; similarly in the Greek text of Judith 15:12). Wetstein shows at this passage that the same custom for manifesting joy and for honoring princely men was very often observed among the ancients; among other things it is read in the Targum on Esther 10:15: "When Mordecai went out from the gate of the king, the streets were strewn with myrtle, and the courtyards with purple."

And such an exhibition of exultation, which is done with scattered flowers and green branches, arises almost spontaneously from human nature. Whence, both on account of those examples and on account of the impulse of human nature which is the same everywhere, Wünsche is to be ridiculed, who notes at this passage that "without any doubt either the evangelist erred, while he attributed the rite and ceremony of the Feast of Tabernacles to the Feast of Passover, or deliberately transferred that rite to this feast day." Concerning the Feast of Tabernacles, see Leviticus 23:40. Will Wünsche also maintain that in Revelation 7:9 the Feast of Tabernacles is being depicted?

Mt 21:9 As we learn from John 12:12-13, a great crowd that had come for the feast day also went out from the city to meet Christ, rejoicing and carrying branches; moreover, many others from Bethany accompanied Him in festive manner. Matthew also seems to indicate these two crowds, writing in verse 9: "And the crowds that went before, and those that followed, were crying out, saying..." Those that went before seem to have been those who, having heard the news from Jerusalem, went out to meet Him; and those who followed [were from Bethany].

They cried out, saying: "Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!" As is done in a triumphal procession, with joyful acclamations they greet Jesus and wish Him divine aid. The words are taken from Psalm 117 (Hebrew 118):25-26. And indeed "Hosanna" (Hebrew אָנָּה הוֹשִׁיעָה; LXX: σῶσον δή), which Symmachus interpreted as "save, I pray"; St. Jerome: "it is the same as 'help, I beseech'." Therefore they greet Jesus as "Son of David," the Messiah, and they wish Him divine help and aid, namely, that in His messianic work God may grant Him victory and prosperity.

Jansenius explains well: "Therefore by these words they do not ask salvation for themselves from Christ, but rejoicing that they have now received Him whom they had expected, the Messiah, and receiving Him with joy as their king, they pray that from God salvation and all happiness and prosperity may befall Him, so that under Him and through Him they themselves also may be saved and live happily, freed from the tyranny of all enemies by which they were oppressed." Similarly Maldonatus, Lapide, etc. And in the same way must be explained: "Blessed is He who comes," that is, "may He be blessed by God; may God be favorable to Him, prosper and favor His kingdom, so that through Him we also may be blessed" (Jansenius).

"In the name of the Lord": the name of God is put for God Himself, but in such a way that it designates the whole of what God has manifested to us by His revelation; for by the name of a thing we are accustomed to designate its nature and virtues and to indicate the thing to others (see what I have said in my commentary on Isaiah I, p. 293). Therefore, "in the name of the Lord He comes" who comes in union with God, who manifests Himself to men and that He may manifest Himself to men. From this union with God, who wishes to manifest Himself to others and to bestow something, those explanations which are commonly offered easily follow: to come as one sent by God; to come as bearing the person of God, namely, by His authority and confidence.

"Blessed in the name of the Lord" could also be joined so that blessing befall Him and be wished for Him from union with God who, bestowing benefits, manifests Himself. For which joining can be adduced that all blessings are said to be given "in the name of the Lord" (cf. Numbers 6:27; Deuteronomy 21:5; 2 Kings 6:18). But the prior joining is commonly adopted.

Finally is added: "Hosanna in the highest," that is, "save from heaven; from Your highest throne grant salvation, so that it may descend from there and be most abundantly bestowed upon the Son of David and upon us." For they ask God that from heaven, divinely, miraculously, He may preserve the new kingdom (Maldonatus); whence it is the same as if it were said: "From the highest summit of the heavens, save and grant prosperity to the King Messiah" (Lapide).

Some explain: "Save, You who are in the highest, on the heavenly throne," supplying the article ὁ or ὁ ὤν, as Jansenius, Vatablus, Calovius, Bengel, Kuinoel do. But Maldonatus rightly objects against this already: that this seems too harsh and unusual; and Lapide similarly rejects that supplementation. Equally to be rejected is what Euthymius and Fritzsche wish: that the angels be called upon so that they also in heaven may pray for salvation.

This Psalm, from which the prior words are repeated, belongs to the so-called Great Hallel (Psalms 112-117 Hebrew; 113-118), or the Great Alleluia of the Jews, which was also recited at the paschal supper in such a way that Psalms 112-113 [were sung] before the cup at the supper; Psalms 114-117 after the supper at the fourth cup. Therefore these very words, by the very reckoning of time, were familiar to the crowds. Moreover, this Hallel was also accustomed to be recited on new moons and on the feast of the Dedication. Furthermore, in the Mishnah, tractate Succah (concerning tabernacles), it is reported that on each of the seven days of the Feast of Tabernacles the altar was surrounded once with a festive procession, and Psalm 118:25 "Hosanna" was said (cf. Surenhusius II, p. 274, cap. 4-5). Indeed, Buxtorf reports that this feast is called "Hosanna," and the seventh day is called "the Great Hosanna," and the prayers poured forth at that time are likewise called "Hosannoth," and the bundle of willows also, concerning which in Leviticus 23:40, is called "Hosanna" because in its carrying about and waving they repeatedly acclaim "Hosanna" (Lexicon Chaldaicum, p. 992).

Add to this what Agellius already notes on Psalm 117:26 "Blessed is He...": "The Hebrews wish these words to be those of the priests of that time, who received Israelites approaching the temple with this form of acclamation." Similarly Schegg, Fillion, Edersheim, Delitzsch on Psalm 118. But although therefore these words were sufficiently familiar to the people, nevertheless it ought not to be doubted that the crowds did not burst forth into these voices by a blind and inconsiderate impulse of custom, but by a certain divine instinct (Maldonatus), and celebrated Jesus as Messiah, Son of David.

Since grace, as they say, presupposes nature, these words were known; but that they used them and addressed Him as "Son of David," and accompanied the King Messiah with festive procession into His royal city, into the temple—this was of a higher counsel of God and an impulse impressed by Jesus upon their souls.

The word "Hosanna" exercised the minds of certain ancients. Origen explains it well, adducing Aquila's interpretation: σῶσον δή. St. Jerome, in his letter to Pope Damasus (Epistle 20; M 22, 376), reports various opinions: "Many have invented diverse things concerning this word; among whom our Hilary, in his commentaries on Matthew, has placed it thus: 'Hosanna' in the Hebrew language signifies 'redemption of the house of David'; others have thought it means 'glory'; not a few, 'grace'." Euthymius says it signifies now a hymn, now σῶσον δή; but in this place, "a hymn to the Son of David." Theophylact has similar things. St. Augustine says the word is of one beseeching: "as some say who know the Hebrew language, [it is] rather indicating an affect than signifying some thing, just as there are in the Latin language what are called interjections; that this is to be believed so to be because neither the Greek nor the Latin could translate this, just as that [word] who says to his brother 'Racha'—for this also is said to be an interjection, showing the affect of one indignant" (In Ioannem, tract. 51, 2; M 35, 1764).

St. Jerome delivers the true interpretation (ibid.), recurring to Psalm 117 and establishing that there Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and the fifth edition express σῶσον δή; "but we, for 'osianna,' corruptly on account of ignorance, say 'osanna'—'save' or 'save, I pray'." St. Paschasius writes: "What is had in the codices 'Hosanna to the Son of David,' to some has seemed more Latin if it be said 'Hosanna, son of David' in the vocative case, so that the sense may be: 'I beseech, son of David, save!'—which already several have dared to emend in their codices." And indeed "fili David" [vocative] is read in the Dub, Eg, Lich, Wil manuscripts; "filii" [genitive] in Ken, Rush; likewise at verse 15. But concerning such a reading, St. Paschasius rightly judges "that it seems not undeservedly rash, since both the Greek codices and the Latin ones, whichever I have been able to inspect, have the dative case"—which dative Jansenius, Maldonatus, Lapide explain from the Hebrew ל, to which הוֹשִׁיעָה is frequently joined (Deuteronomy 22:27; Joshua 10:6; Judges 7:2; 1 Samuel 25:26; Psalms 44:4; 86:16).

On the Manifestation of Christ's Royal Dignity and Humility

How in that procession both Christ's royal dignity and His humility were declared, Jansenius explains somewhat as follows:

It was a sign of royal power and magnificence that at the mere command and signification of necessity, the owners of the beasts yielded them for His use; that He predicted to the disciples whom He had sent that it would so happen; then, that sitting upon a beast of burden He was carried, whereas He had always been accustomed to go on foot; and that with such concordant minds, with such great applause and veneration, He was freely acclaimed by a great people, notwithstanding the prohibitions of the Pharisees—by whom also long before it had been provided that no one should confess Him to be the Christ—and acclaimed not with any words whatever, but with words of Scripture; finally, that entering the temple He healed the blind and the lame. For by all these things He declared that all things were known to Him and subject to His power, and that he had the hearts of all in His power so that He might incline them whither He would.

But it was of humility that He used a borrowed and accommodated beast; that He sat upon a little donkey, nothing less than a royal steed; that He sat upon the garments of poor disciples, not upon golden vestments; surrounded by unarmed companions, who in place of spears and swords carried branches of trees in their hands. By which indeed He declared that the condition of His kingdom was other than that of the kingdoms of this world.

On the Rejection by Jerusalem

Mt 21:10 But the King Messiah is not received in the royal city with faith and joy. (v. 10) "And when He had entered Jerusalem, the whole city was moved." A great concourse was made from all sides; but "the whole city," that is, the greater part and those who were first in authority—the scribes, Pharisees, priests—were moved, not with joy and admiration, but with envy and a certain malignant indignation, that they saw so much honor being given to Christ; which indeed is understood from the following words (Maldonatus). For they ask, as if they had never seen Jesus, never heard about Him: "Who is this?"—which question is of those indignant and vexed. For they had known Jesus for three years already, and what He said and professed Himself to be they likewise had perceived (cf. Matthew 26:63; 27:40, 43; John 10:33; 19:7). Nevertheless, angry, they exclaim: "Who and what sort is this, that He deserves so much honor?"—by which word they betray their contempt and envy.

With what contempt He was received in the principal city, Matthew alone here teaches us; Luke also hints at something (19:39), when already on the way certain of the Pharisees had said to Jesus that He should rebuke His disciples who were crying out. Therefore the obstinacy and contumacy of the citizens and princes of the city is depicted. They indeed desired a Messiah coming with glory and pomp; but Jesus, even approaching in triumph, they spurn and reject, most unjustly bearing the honor with which He is affected by the crowds of those journeying to the feast. For the Pharisees said among themselves: "You see that you profit nothing; behold, the whole world has gone after Him" (John 12:19).

Mt 21:11 And by that coldness and contempt and indignation of the Jerusalemites, even the zeal and admiration and faith of the crowds themselves seemed to be depressed. For they do not profess with joy that they are companions of the Son of David, the Messiah, and that they are introducing Him into their city; but, omitting the messianic dignity, they say: "This is Jesus the prophet from Nazareth of Galilee." Since among the crowds ascending to Jerusalem for the feast there were also many Galileans, this answer given to the Jerusalemites seems also to savor of a certain provincial vanity—that from their province had arisen a prophet so notable and distinguished by miracles wrought, whom the Galileans now display to the metropolis in triumph.

Whatever finally it is, that indignation of those saying "Who is this?" and the response of the crowd now no longer professing the Messiah King, is a sufficiently dire augury by which it is again made manifest that the Messiah would be rejected by His people. Therefore the solemn procession ends in a sad presage.

Again Jesus taught who He was, and that from Zechariah's oracle in a certain most evident manner which they could not ignore; but in vain again do the leaders of the people repel the offered grace; rather, from that occasion they take [reason for] greater hatred. Whence by this very triumph is confirmed the word of Jesus (20:18): [that He would be delivered up].