(Vers. 25.)
(Verse 25.) It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.
70. Great power, great weight in words. For with what other words could one express more vigorously that one should not boast of being rich in one's wealth than with such words by which it is defined as against nature to be a wealthy merciful person? Take away from me the allurements and deceit of words, which usually weaken the meaning. That person should not have been pleased but broken, who rejected mercy. However, if some people are more delighted by the embellishments of words than by a strong and natural meaning and form, which seekers of good do in choosing a wife, in order to examine their character, not their beauty; nor are they turned away by appearance, when they are provoked by virtue of character: even they should seek a mystery in words, which is a certain mind and soul of words; nor should they separate words in the mystery.
Therefore, the camel is accepted as a symbol of the Gentile people, whom that lion is seeking to devour, burdened with the treasure of prophetic visions into the desert: for in tribulation and distress, the lion and the lion's cub, asp vipers and the offspring of flying asps, were carrying their riches on donkeys and camels (Isaiah XXX, 6). And the camel is well represented as a figure of the Gentile people; because degenerating with the deformity of superstition, before the people of the nations believed, it presented the appearance of a beastly ugliness, absurd footprints, and disgusting faces. Therefore, that sinner entered more easily through the narrow way (which is the way of Christ, who, by the passion of his own body's death, opened again like a needle torn pieces of our natural garment) than the rich people of the Jewish law, poor( in faith, steeped in rage, disgraceful in crime.
72. It can also be understood morally about every sinner and about the arrogant rich man. Does it not seem to you that the publican, burdened by the consciousness of his sins, when he did not dare to lift his eyes to God (Luke 18:13), entered the remedy of his own confession more easily, like a camel through the eye of a needle, than that Pharisee entered the kingdom of God, arrogant in prayer, boasting of his innocence, presuming on glory, reproaching mercy, preaching himself, accusing others: who would be more fitting to come before the Lord than to ask? Therefore, if someone is disgusted by a camel, let them be disgusted by someone who is even more hideous than a camel.
(Vers. 20.)
(Verse 20) Honor your father and mother.
73. Today the beginning of the Law is read beautifully to me, as it is the anniversary of my ordination; every year the priesthood seems to begin anew when the age of time is renewed. It is also good that it is read: Honor your father and mother (Exodus XX, 12). For you are my parents, who have brought me to the priesthood: you, I say, are both children and parents: children individually, parents collectively; for I am glad to call you either my children or parents, because you hear and do the word of God: children, because it is written: Come, children, listen to me (Psalm XXXIII, 12): parents, because the Lord Himself said: Who is my mother or my brothers? My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it (Luke 8:21).
So then the Law which had foretold: You shall love the Lord your God and you shall love your neighbor, added: Honor your father and your mother. For this is the first step of piety; for God wanted these to be your authors. Honor them with obedience, in order to abstain from insults, because even by a look piety towards parents is hurt. But it is not enough to not hurt, because the Law foresaw that they should not suffer injury: for whoever curses his father or mother, shall be put to death (Exod. XXI, 17): honor them, that you may be good. It is one thing to receive the benefit of the law, another to fulfill the duty of piety. Honor your own, because the Son of God honored His own. For you have read, 'And he was subject to them' (Luke 2:51): if God, being a servant, obeyed His parents, how much more should you obey yours? Therefore, Christ honored Joseph and Mary not out of obligation of nature, but out of the duty of piety. He also honored God the Father, as no one could honor Him, by being obedient even unto death. Therefore, you should also honor your parents.
But honor is not only for honor, but also for generosity: Honor widows who are truly widows (I Tim. V, 3). For honor is to give due to merit. Feed your father, feed your mother. And if you have fed your mother, you have not yet paid back the pains, the torments she has suffered for you: you have not repaid the services she has borne for you: you have not repaid the nourishment she has given you with tender affection of piety, nourishing your lips with her breasts: you have not repaid the hunger she has endured for you; so that she would not eat anything harmful to you, nor drink anything harmful to milk. She fasted for you, she ate for you, she did not accept the food she desired for you, she took the food she did not desire for you, she stayed awake for you, she wept for you: and do you allow her to be in need? Oh son, how much judgment you take upon yourself if you do not feed your parent! You owe to her what you have, to whom you owe what you are. How much judgment, if the Church feeds those whom you refuse to feed! If anyone is faithful, he says, or if anyone has widows, let him assist them; so that the Church may not be burdened, but may suffice for those who are truly widows (1 Timothy 5:16). This is about strangers: what about parents?
76. We spoke recently not without reason, because we were touched by our mother's complaint: but we preferred to admonish publicly rather than to punish privately. And if he is not exposed by our voice, he is ashamed at least by his own affection. Do not pity, my son, that other people's hunger feeds your parents: do not pity, my son, that the poor seek food from your parents' fasting. Whether for the sake of gratitude and salvation, or for the sake of shame, feed yourself, my son, or you, my daughter. Are you not ashamed that when you enter the Church, an old mother extends her hands for alms, while you pass by with your head held high, casting glances with your eyes, trailing your clothing, wearing earrings, and rings, and all the other things that Isaiah mentions (Isa. III, 16 et seq)? What if she were to turn her talk towards you, demanding the debt of nature, the price of nourishment, that which is owed to a mother's hand? Quid respondebis?
Will you give to others? What if they say to you: Go, first feed your mother. For even if they are poor, they do not seek impiety in exchange. Have you not heard above that the rich man, reclining in fine linen and purple, from whose table Lazarus gathered crumbs, is tormented with eternal punishment for not sharing food with the poor (Luke 16:19 et seq.)? If it is not burdensome to give to strangers, how much more burdensome is it to exclude parents? But you say that you prefer to confer with your parents, you would rather contribute to the Church. God does not seek a gift from the hunger of parents. Therefore, in response to the Jews who criticized the disciples of the Lord for not washing their hands, Jesus said: Whoever speaks: Whatever gift is from me, it will benefit you, it will not honor the father or mother (Matthew XV, 5 and 6).
78. Therefore, we wisely avoided the obscurity of meaning. For the Jews, when they follow the tradition of men, neglect the commandments of God; but the disciples, preferring the tradition of God, neglected the commands of men, such as washing their hands when they ate bread. For, the one who is completely clean does not need to wash his hands (John 13:10). Jesus had washed them, they did not seek another washing; for by one Baptism, Christ has done away with all baptisms. Therefore, whoever is washed in the Church has no need to be washed again. Thus the disciples were focused on the mystery, seeking not the cleanliness of the body but of the soul. The Jews criticized this, but they are cleverly rebuked by the Lord for observing empty traditions while neglecting things that are beneficial. And so He says to them: Why do you say to your father or mother, whom the Law commands you to honor: Whatever gift you would have received from me is beneficial to you (Exodus 20:12); that is, when a father or mother, fearing the Law, asks for something from their son because they are in need of support, the Jew typically seeks an excuse for not giving and says: Whatever gift you would have received from me is beneficial to you, so that a religious father might refrain from accepting money given to God from his children. This tradition of men is an excuse for those who conceal their greed. But the tradition of God is that you should first feed your parents. (Dist. 86, chap. Caeterum) For if, according to the divine oracle, insult to a parent is paid for by death (Exod. XXI, 17), how much more so hunger, which is a graver death!
In what place does the Lord rein in the insolence of boasting? For many, as they are preached by men, contribute to the Church, which takes away from their own possessions; whereas mercy should proceed from domestic duty of piety. Therefore, first give to your parent, also give to the poor, give to that priest what earthly things abound to you, so that you may receive from him spiritual things that are lacking to you; for he who honors will be honored. Therefore, see that when he receives, he hands over: and he receives not as one in need, but as one who will repay with a greater measure. Give rest to the poor, so that you, communicating of your own poverty, may obtain rest. But as the Scripture says about feeding one's parents (Luke 14:26): so for the sake of God, parents should be left behind if they hinder the affections of a devoted mind.
(Vers. 35.)
(Verse 35.) And it came to pass, when he was near Jericho, a certain blind man sat by the road.
80. In the second book of Matthew, two instances are mentioned (Matt. XX, 30), one here: as Jericho is being left, another there: as Jericho is being approached. But there is no difference; for although in this one instance the representation is of a Gentile people who receive the light of lost sight by means of the Lord's sacrament, it makes no difference whether he receives the healing in one instance or in two instances; since the authors, who trace their descent from the sons of Noah, Ham and Japheth, show two instances of their own kind in two blind men.
81. What Luke also seems not to have omitted, when he mentions Zacchaeus, who was of short stature, that is, lacking in the innate dignity of nobility, insignificant in merits, like the people of nations, desired to see the Lord's Savior, whom they had not received. But no one easily sees Jesus, no one can see Jesus as established on earth. And because he did not have prophets, he did not have a kingdom, he ascended in favor of his natural beauty among the sycamores, trampling on the vanity of the Jews, and correcting the errors of the previous age: and for this reason, he received Jesus in the inner house as a guest. And he went up a tree to make the good tree produce good fruits, and being naturally cut out from the wild olive tree, and contrary to nature, grafted into the good olive tree, he was able to bring forth the fruit of the Law; for the root is holy, and if the branches are useless, the people of the Gentiles surpass their fruitless glory by faith in the resurrection, as if by a kind of elevation of the body.
(Chap. XIX. — Vers. 2.)
(Chapter 19, Verse 2) And behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus.
82. Zacchaeus in the sycamore, a blind man on the road. The Lord expects to have mercy on one, he honors the other with the glory of his dwelling: he interrogates the one he is about to heal, he invites himself to the one he will not be invited to; for he knew that there would be a generous reward from his host, but even if he had not yet heard the voice of the inviter, he had heard his affection.
83. But lest we seem to have quickly abandoned that blind man, as if he were a despised beggar, and passed on to the wealthy man, let us wait for him, because the Lord has waited for us: let us question him, because Christ has questioned us. Let us question him, because we do not know: he questioned, because he knew: let us question, so that we may know from where this man has been healed: he questioned, so that we may learn from many in one how we may deserve to see the Lord; he questioned, so that we may believe that the unconfessing cannot be healed.
And immediately he saw him, and he followed him, magnifying the Lord. . . . And he went about in Jericho (Chapter 18, verse 43).
84. For he would not see otherwise, unless he followed Christ, unless he preached the Lord, unless he passed by the world. Let us also return to favor with the wealthy; for we do not want to offend the wealthy, because we want, if possible, to heal all; so that, not being preoccupied with the comparison of a camel, and not having abandoned Zacchaeus too quickly, they may not have a legitimate cause for offense.
85. It is not a crime to have abilities, but to not know how to use them; for wealth, like obstacles for the wicked, is a support for the virtuous. Certainly, Zacchaeus was chosen by Christ as rich; but by giving half of his wealth to the poor, and even by repaying four times what he had obtained by fraud (for one is not enough: generosity does not have grace if injustice persists; because gifts, not spoils, are sought), he received a more abundant reward than he bestowed.