Matthew 22 · The Lantern

And Iesus answered and spake vnto them agayne in similitudes sayinge.

Seest thou both in the former parable and in this the difference between the Son and the servants? Seest thou at once the great affinity between both parables, and the great difference also? For this also indicates God's long-suffering, and His great providential care, and the Jews' ingratitude. But this parable hath something also more than the other.

This parable, too, like that of the vineyard, alludes to the disobedience of the Jews. But as that one indicates Christ's death, so this one indicates the nuptial joy, that is, the resurrection. But this parable also shows them to be worse transgressors than the men in the preceding parable. For the husbandmen of the vineyard slew those who demanded fruits of them.

It was said above that the persecutors of Christ were provoked to kill him for three reasons: because of his glory, because of his wisdom by which he confuted them, and because of his justice by which he rebuked them. How they were provoked by Christ's glory has been discussed; now we must discuss how they were provoked by his wisdom.

The kingdome of heve is lyke vnto a certayne kynge which maryed his sonne

The kingdom of heaven, in respect of Him who reigns there, is like a king; in respect of Him who shares the kingdom, it is like a king's son; in respect of those things which are in the kingdom, it is like servants and guests, and among them the king's armies.

(Hom. in Ev. xxxviii. 2.) Here, by the wedding-feast is denoted the present Church; there, by the supper, the last and eternal feast. For into this enter some who shall perish; into that whosoever has once entered in shall never be put forth.

The kingdom of heaven is likened to a king who made a marriage for his son. Here the parable of the wedding is presented, and a similar parable is presented in Luke 14:16. And according to Gregory, it does not seem to be the same, because there mention is made of a supper, here of a wedding. Likewise, no one was excluded from that supper, but here someone is excluded.

and sent forth his servantes to call them that were byd to the weddinge and they wolde not come.

Or; The servants who were first sent to call them that were bidden to the wedding, are to be taken as the Prophets converting the people by their prophecy to the festival of the restoration of the Church to Christ. They who would not come at the first message are they who refused to hear the words of the Prophets.

All the faithful know the story of the marriage of the king's son, and his feast. They know that the Lord's table is open to all who are willing correctly to receive it.

There follows the calling of the Jews. And first a twofold calling is presented; secondly, the excuse, at but they neglected, etc. Concerning the first, he does two things according to the two callings. Hence he says, and he sent his servants to call those that were invited.

Ageyne he sent forth other servauntes sayinge: Tell them which are bydden: beholde I have prepared my dynner myne oxen and my fatlinges are kylled and all thinges are redy come vnto the mariage.

Or otherwise; The oxen are the glorious army of Martyrs, offered, like choice victims, for the confession of God; the fatlings are spiritual men, as birds fed for flight upon heavenly food, that they may fill others with the abundance of the food they have eaten.

(ubi sup.) But because these who were first invited would not come to the feast, the second summons says, Behold, I have prepared my dinner. (ubi sup.) By the oxen are signified the Fathers of the Old Testament; who by sufferance of the Law gored their enemies with the horn of bodily strength.

Again he sent other servants. Here another invitation is presented. And an increase of benevolence on the part of the one inviting is presented, and an increase of malice on the part of those refusing. In the first calling he promised nothing; but in this one he promises, because he says, tell them that were invited: behold, I have prepared my dinner.

But they made light of it and went their wayes: one to his ferme place another about his marchaundise

the remnaunt toke his seruantes and intreated them vngodly and slewe them.

And to me they seem moreover to make use of these excuses, putting forward these things as cloke for their negligence. And not this only is the grievous thing, that they came not, but also that which is a far more violent and furious act, to have even beaten them that came, and to have used them despitefully, and to have slain them; this is worse than the former.

Nay often, which is worse, some who are called not only reject the grace, but become persecutors, And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them despitefully, and slew them.

There follows, and the rest laid hands on his servants, i.e., the apostles, and having treated them contumeliously, put them to death, because they killed many from both the Old and New Testaments. Hence below, 23:34: I send to you wise men and scribes, and some of them you will kill, etc.

When the kinge hearde that he was wroth and send forth his warryers and distroyed those murtherers and brent vp their cyte.

Let those who sin against the God of the Law, and the Prophets, and the whole creation, declare whether He who is here called man, and is said to be angry, is indeed the Father Himself.

"But when the king learned of this, he sent his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city." He destroys the murderers because he slays the persecutors. He burns their city with fire because not only their souls but also the flesh in which they had dwelt is tormented by the eternal flame of hell.

Then follows their punishment: but when the king had heard of it, he was angry, etc. Above he presented the spiritual penalty; here he presents the temporal one; hence above it was said a king, but here it says the king, because the name of man seems to pertain to mercy, but that of king to punishment; therefore here only king is said; Wisdom 14:17: those whom men could not hon…

Then sayde he to his servauutes: the weddinge was prepared. But they which were bydden were not worthy.

He saith to His servants, that is, to the Apostles; or to the Angels, who were set over the calling of the Gentiles, The wedding is ready. Or otherwise; I suppose this first bidding to the wedding to have been a bidding of some of the more noble minds.

That is, the whole sacrament of the human dispensation is completed and closed. But they which, were bidden, (Rom. 10:3.) that is, the Jews, were not worthy, because, ignorant of the righteousness of God, and going about to establish their own righteousness, they have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God.

There follows the calling of the gentiles, and the examination is presented. And he does three things. First, the command is presented; secondly, the execution; thirdly, the effect. The second is at and his servants going forth, etc.; the third at and the wedding was furnished with guests. Concerning the first, he does two things.

Go ye therfore out into ye hyewayes and as many as ye finde byd them to the mariage.

By the street also is to be understood the time of this world, and they are therefore bid to go to the crossings of the streets, because the past is remitted to all.

(ubi sup.) Or otherwise; In holy Scripture, way is taken to mean actions; so that the crossings of the ways we understand as failure in action, for they usually come to God readily, who have had little prosperity in worldly actions.

There follows the command: go therefore into the highways, etc. By the ways are understood diverse teachings, because these are certain ways that lead us to the truth. The gentiles are at the exits of the teachings. Hence, go to the highways, i.e., to those who cling to erroneous teachings. Or otherwise. Isaiah 9:2: the people that walked in darkness have seen a great light.

The seruauntes wet out into the hiewayes and gaddered to gedder as many as they coulde fynde both good and bad and ye weddinge was furnysshed with gestes.

Then the kynge came in to viset the gestes and spyed there a ma which had not on a weddinge garment

Therefore the apostate withal will recover his former "garment," the robe of the Holy Spirit; and a renewal of the "ring," the sign and seal of baptism; and Christ will again be "slaughtered; " and he will recline on that couch from which such as are unworthily clad are wont to be lifted by the torturers, and cast away into darkness, -much more such as have been stripped.

Or; The marriage garment is the commandments of the Lord, and the works which are done under the Law and the Gospel, and form the clothing of the new man. Whoso among the Christian body shall be found in the day of judgment not to have these, is straightway condemned. He saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment?

And the king went in, etc. Here the examination of those gathered is presented. And first the examiner is presented; secondly, the examination; thirdly, the condemnation. The examiner entered.

and sayde vnto him: frende how fortuned it that thou camest in hither and hast not on a weddyng garment? And he was eve spechlesse.

And forasmuch as he who is in sin, and puts not on the Lord Jesus Christ, has no excuse, it follows, But he was speechless.

Consider, I ask, whether you have come to this wedding feast with a wedding garment; examine your thoughts with anxious inquiry. Weigh your hearts concerning each matter: whether you now hold hatred against no one, whether you are not inflamed by any torch of envy against another's good fortune, whether you do not hasten to harm anyone through hidden malice.

Then follows the examination. Then he says how he fell short. He says therefore, friend. He calls him friend on account of faith, or because he himself loved him. Or it can be said that wherever he calls someone friend, he says it by way of reproach: hence he reproaches the love with which he loved him. How camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment?

Then sayde the kynge to his ministers: take and bynde hym hand and fote and caste hym into vtter darcknes there shalbe wepinge and gnasshinge of teth.

He affirms, lastly, that "the very hairs of our head are all numbered," and in the affirmation He of course includes the promise of their safety; for if they were to be lost, where would be the use of having taken such a numerical care of them?

(de Trin. xi. 6.) The bonds of wicked and depraved desires are the chains which bind him who deserves to be cast out into outer darkness.

And the parable concludes with the sentence. A twofold punishment is presented: the punishment of loss and the punishment of sense. For in this world a man is perfected in three ways: through the intellect by thinking, through the affections by tending toward the highest good, and likewise through action; therefore he is punished in three ways.

For many are called and feawe be chosen.

Then wet the Pharises and toke counsell how they might tagle him in his wordes.

From this place we learn by the Saviour's example not to be allured by those things which have many voices for them, and thence seem famous, but to incline rather to those things which are spoken according to some method of reason. But we may also understand this place morally, that we ought to give some things to the body as a tribute to Cæsar, that is to say, necessaries.

What took place was a plot: therefore Luke also calls them spies (Lk. 20:20), or waylayers, sent secretly to set a trap for Christ. "Herodians" were either soldiers of Herod or those who thought Herod was the Christ. For since the princely line of Judah had failed when Herod, who was not of that line, became king, the Herodians thought that Herod himself was the Christ.

Above, the Lord confuted the Pharisees by a parable; secondly, here he makes his point by disputing. And first, by responding; secondly, by raising objections, at but when the Pharisees had gathered together, he asked them, etc. And the Lord responds to a threefold question.

And they sent vnto him their disciples with Herodes servauntes sayinge: Master we knowe yt thou are true and teachest the waye of god trulie nether carest for eny man for thou consydrest not menes estate.

For they were now tributaries, their state having passed under the rule of the Romans. Forasmuch then as they saw that Theudas and Judas with their companies for this cause were put to death, as having prepared for a revolt, they were minded to bring Him too by these words into such a suspicion.

Thinking to placate and disarm Him with praise, they flatter Him, so that when He had let down His guard He would say that it was not necessary to pay the tax, and upon that they would seize Him as an insurrectionist who was stirring up the people against Caesar.

The agents are described when he says, and they sent their disciples with the Herodians. But why did they not go themselves? The reason is that they wished to question deceitfully: hence if they had gone, the deceit would have had no place; but these were also disciples; Sirach 10:2: as the judge of the people is himself, so also are his ministers. With the Herodians.

Tell vs therfore: how thynkest thou? Is it lawfull to geve tribute vnto Cesar or not?

This smooth and treacherous enquiry was a kind of challenge to the answerer to fear God rather than Cæsar, and immediately they say, Tell us therefore, what thinkest Thou? Is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar or not? Should He say tribute should not be paid, the Herodians would immediately accuse Him as a person disaffected to the Emperor.

What then does the Wisdom and the Word of God do? Jesus allows all their passion to appear for all to see, without them taking back the words they were speaking to no purpose. And like a skillful physician, he then lances their passion with a deep incision, when he cut with the first word.

There follows the question: tell us therefore, is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? The census was a tax that was given per head.

Iesus perceaved their wikednes and sayde: Why tempte ye me ye ypocrites?

What then saith He? "Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?" Seest thou how He talks with them with more than usual severity? For since their wickedness was now complete and manifest, He cuts the deeper, first confounding and silencing them, by publishing their secret thoughts, and making it manifest to all with what kind of intent they are coming unto Him.

He makes an answer not corresponding to the smooth tone of their address, but harsh, suitable to their cruel thoughts; for God answers men's hearts, and not their words. He therefore calls them hypocrites, that seeing Him to be a discerner of human hearts, they might not be hardy enough to carry through their design.

There follows the response: but Jesus knowing their wickedness, said. And first he responds to their mind; secondly, to their words, at render. Because it belongs to man to respond to words, but to God to respond to the mind, therefore because Christ was God and man, he responds to both. The searcher of hearts and reins is God, Psalm 7:10. Hypocrites.

Let me se ye tribute money. And they toke hym a peny.

He stopped not, however, at the rebuke, although it was enough merely to have convicted them of their purpose, and to have put them to shame for their wickedness; but He stops not at this, but in another way closes their mouths; for, "Shew me," saith He, "the tribute money." And when they had shown it, as He ever doth, by their tongue He brings out the decision, and causes them…

(Verse 19.) Show me the coin of the census. And they offered him a denarius. Wisdom always acts wisely, so that its accusers are mainly confuted by their own words. Show me, he said, the denarius, that is, the kind of coin which was valued at ten coins and had the image of Caesar.

Likewise, when he wishes to respond to something, he cannot better confute an opponent than according to his own words. Hence first he poses a question; secondly, from the response he draws out the truth. And first he asks about the coin; secondly, about the image: for he wished to show his point sensibly; Proverbs 14:6: the learning of the wise is easy.

And he sayde vnto them: whose is this ymage and superscripcion?

They sayde vnto him: Cesars. Then sayde he vnto them. Geve therfore to Cesar that which is Cesars: and geve vnto god that which is goddes.

Will it be "Ye cannot serve God and mammon" to devote your energies to mammon, and to depart from God? Will it be "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's," not only not to render the human being to God, but even to take the denarius from Caesar? Is the laurel of the triumph made of leaves, or of corpses?

(Verse 21) They said to Him, 'Caesar's.' Then He said to them, 'Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.' We cannot consider Augustus as Caesar, but Tiberius is understood to be his stepson, who succeeded him and under whom our Lord suffered.

They say, Caesar's: understand, not Caesar Augustus, but Tiberius Caesar. And you should understand that the Lord's question was not from ignorance, but rather from design. He was well of such an age, and had lived so long among men, that he knew well the form of a denarius, but he asked for the sake of signification.

When they hearde that they marveled and lefte hym and went there waye.

When they heard these things, their mouths were stopped, and they "marvelled" at His wisdom. Ought they not then to have believed, ought they not to have been amazed. For indeed, He gave them proof of His Godhead, by revealing the secrets of their hearts, and with gentleness did He silence them.

(Verse 22) And those who listened were amazed. They, who should have believed in such wisdom, were amazed that their cunning for plotting had found no opportunity. And having left him, they departed. Bringing back unfaithfulness along with a miracle.

There follows the effect: and hearing it, they wondered and leaving him, went their ways. It was a wonder, because immediately, having seen his wisdom, they should have been converted; but they could not grasp it, and they withdrew; Psalm 138:6: thy knowledge is become wonderful to me: it is high, and I cannot reach to it.

The same daye the Saduces came to him (which saye that there is no resurrcecion) and axed him

If, then, forasmuch as there is in the law a precept that a man is to take in marriage the wife of his brother if he have died without children, for the purpose of raising up seed to his brother; and this may happen repeatedly to the same person, according to that crafty question of the Sadducees; men for that reason think that frequency of marriage is permitted in other cases…

(Mor. xiv. 55.) But there are who observing that the spirit is loosed from the body, that the flesh is turned to corruption, that the corruption is reduced to dust, and that the dust again is resolved into the elements, so as to be unseen by human eyes, despair of the possibility of a resurrection, and while they look upon the dry bones, doubt that they can be clothed with fles…

That day. Here the second question is presented, and he does three things. First, the question is presented; secondly, the response; thirdly, the effect. The second is at but Jesus answering, etc.; the third at and the multitudes hearing it were in admiration. Concerning the first, first the disposition and condition of the questioner is presented; secondly, the question.

sayinge: Master Moses bade yf a man dye havinge no chyldre that the brother mary his wyfe and reyse vp seed vnto his brother.

And again, these too attack Him with a show of moderation, saying, "Master, Moses said, If a man die, not having children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased; and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother.

As they disbelieved the resurrection of the body, and supposed that the soul perished with the body, they accordingly invent a fable to display the fondness of the belief of a resurrection. Thus they put forward a base fiction to overthrow the verity of the resurrection.

There follows the question. And first he presents the law; secondly, the case; thirdly, the question. They say, therefore, and they interrogated him, saying: master, Moses said: if a man die, having no son, etc. Deuteronomy 25:5 f. What was the reason for the law? The people were carnal. Hence they sought nothing but temporal things. The law, therefore, promised these.

Ther were wt vs seven brethre and the fyrste maried and deceased wt oute yssue and lefte his wyfe vnto his brother.

Lykewise the seconde and ye thryd vnto the sevethe.

Laste of all the woman dyed also.

Now in the resurreccion whose wyfe shall she be of the seven? For all had her.

Iesus answered and sayde vnto the: ye are deceaved and vnderstonde not the scriptures nor yet the power of God.

God; who have restored the honour of their flesh, and who have already dedicated themselves as sons of that (future) age, by slaying in themselves the concupiscence of lust, and that whole (propensity) which could not be admitted within Paradise!

(Enchir. 88.) But that earthy matter of which the flesh of men is made perishes not before God; but into whatsoever dust or ashes reduced, into whatsoever gases or vapours dispersed, into whatsoever other bodies incorporated, though resolved into the elements, though become the food or part of the flesh of animals or men, yet is it in a moment of time restored to that human sou…

There follows the response. And first he shows the error and its cause; secondly, he insinuates the truth. Hence he says, Jesus answering, said to them: you err, i.e., you hold an erroneous opinion; Wisdom 2:21: they devised, and they erred; for their own malice blinded them. And what is the cause of the error? Not knowing the Scriptures.

For in the resurreccion they nether mary nor are maryed: but are as the angels of God in heven.

To this discussion, however, our Lord's declaration puts an effectual end: "They shall be," says He, "equal unto the angels." As by not marrying, because of not dying, so, of course, by not having to yield to any like necessity of our bodily state; even as the angels, too, sometimes were "equal unto" men, by eating and drinking, and submitting their feet to the washing of the b…

(de Civ. Dei, xxii. 17.) To me they seem to think most justly, who doubt not that both sexes shall rise again. For there shall be no desire which is the cause of confusion, for before they had sinned they were naked; and that nature which they then had shall be preserved, which was quit both of conception and of child-birth.

In the resurrection they shall neither marry, nor be married. He makes his point clear. And because he had said two things, namely, that they did not know the Scriptures nor the power of God, therefore first he declares that they were ignorant of the power of God; secondly, that they were ignorant of the Scriptures.

As touchynge the resurreccion of the deed: have ye not redde what is sayde vnto you of God which sayeth:

And again by Moses doth He stop their mouths, since they too had brought forward Moses; and He saith, "But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?

(in Joan. Tr. xi. 8.) God is therefore called in particular The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, because in these three are expressed all the modes of begetting the sons of God. For God begets most times of a good preacher a good son, and of a bad preacher a bad son.

But as concerning the resurrection of the dead, etc. After he showed that they were ignorant of the power of God, here he shows that they were ignorant of the Scriptures. Hence, have you not read that which was said by God, saying to you: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? This is written in Exodus 3:6.

I am Abrahams God and Ysaacks God and the God of Iacob? God is not the God of the deed: but of the lyvinge.

God moreover is He who says, I am that I am; (Ex. 3:14.) so that it is impossible that He should be called the God of those who are not. And see that He said not, I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. But in another place He said thus, The God of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee. (Exod.

(Vers. 31 seqq.) But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken by God, saying to you: I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob: God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. And when the crowds heard this, they were amazed at his teaching.

And how does it serve the purpose? He says, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. God is said to be the God of certain ones in their worshiping him. These, therefore, worship him. But to worship God does not belong to the dead, but to the living.

And when the people hearde that they were astonyed at his doctrine.

When the Pharises had hearde how yt he had put the Saduces to silence they drewe to gedder

For in this law given to Adam we recognise in embryo all the precepts which afterwards sprouted forth when given through Moses; that is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God from thy whole heart and out of thy whole soul; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; Thou shalt not kill; Thou shall not commit adultery; Thou shalt not steal; False witness thou shall not utter; Honour th…

After the humiliation of the Sadducees Jesus was highly regarded by the crowds. The Pharisees, filled with envy out of an immeasurable shamelessness, again were testing him, hypocritically asking if he might deliver a ruling concerning the first commandment. By doing so, perhaps Jesus would amend the commandment in a manner that might lead to an accusation against him.

Above, the Lord responded to the question raised about the payment of tribute, and also to the question about the resurrection; here he responds to the question about the comparison of the divine commandments: and he does two things. First, the question is presented; secondly, the response, at Jesus said to them, etc. Concerning the first, he does two things.

and one of them which was a doctoure of lawe axed a question teptinge h m and sayinge:

Now let us consider one argument of entrapment: "Teacher," he says, "what is the greater commandment in the law?" He says "teacher" trying to entrap him, since he offers his thoughts not as a disciple of Christ. This however, will be clearer from an example we now offer.

(de Cons. Ev. ii. 73.) Let no one find a difficulty in this, that Matthew speaks of this man as putting his question to tempt the Lord, whereas Mark does not mention this, but concludes with what the Lord said to him upon his answering wisely, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.

Likewise, their calculated malice is touched upon, because, in order to confute him more effectively, they gather together; Psalm 2:2: the princes met together against the Lord. They came together in one. It can be said that the Pharisees and Sadducees came together, for although they differed in their sects, yet they united against the Lord.

Master which is ye chefe comaundment in the lawe?

Iesus sayde vnto him: love the Lorde thy God wt all thine herte with all thy soule and with all thy mynde.

Accordingly, the divine law enjoins duties in respect of both these attributes: Thou shalt love God, and, Thou shalt fear God. It proposed one for the obedient man, the other for the transgressor.

But affectual charity is not so: for it draws its order from the first things. For it is wisdom, through which certainly each thing savors as it is: so that, for example, what is of greater value by nature, the affection itself also feels to be of greater value; lesser things less, the least things least.

Before his passion, the doctors of the Law asked Christ which was the greatest and first commandment. He said (Mt 22:37): "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and all your mind; this is the greatest and first commandment." And that is truly the greatest, most noble and most beneficial of all the commandments, as has adequately been shown.

This is the fyrst and the chefe comaundement.

And ther is another lyke vnto this. Love thyne neghbour as thy selfe.

In these two commaundemetes hange all the lawe and the Prophetes.

Whyll the Pharises were gaddered togeder Iesus axed

Then since He had answered, He asks also in turn, "What think ye of Christ, whose Son is He? They say unto Him, The Son of David." See after how many miracles, after how many signs, after how many questions, after how great a display of His unanimity with the Father, as well in words, as in deeds; after having praised this man that said, that there is one God, He asks the quest…

Since they thought He was a mere man, He overturns their belief and by means of the prophecy of David (Ps. 109:1) teaches the truth, that He is also the Lord, proclaiming His own divinity.

And when the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them. After he had responded to them, he himself wished to raise an objection: and he does two things. First, the question is presented; secondly, its effect, at no man was able to answer him a word. Concerning the first, first the question is proposed; secondly, the response; thirdly, he objects against it.

the sayinge: what thinke ye of Christ? Whose sonne is he? They sayde vnto him: the sonne of David.

He sayde vnto the: how then doeth David in spirite call him Lorde sayinge?

It is very worthy for us to consider that our Savior willingly proposed to the Pharisees his question about the Christ, hoping that they might respond in a fitting manner. They were not able to respond adequately.

This passage is out of the 109th Psalm. Christ is therefore called David's Lord, not in respect of His descent from him, but in respect of His eternal generation from the Father, wherein He was before His fleshly Father. And he calls Him Lord, not by a mere chance, nor of his own thought, but by the Holy Spirit.

Then he objects in order to give them to understand the other generation: how then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying: the Lord said to my Lord: sit on my right hand? Psalm 109:1. It is found in the law that the father is greater than the son. Therefore the son is not lord of the father.

The Lorde sayde to my Lorde syt on my right honde: tyll I make thyne enemyes thy fote stole.

Therefore, (as they further hold, ) those other words, "Before the morning star did I beget thee from the womb," are applicable to Hezekiah, and to the birth of Hezekiah.

That He says, Sit thou on my right hand, is not to be taken as though God had a body, and either a right hand or a left hand; but to sit on the right hand of God is to abide in the honour and equality of the Father's majesty. But till is used for indefinite time, that the meaning be, Sit Thou for ever, and for ever hold thine enemies beneath thy feet.

But we can see three things in this authority from the Psalm. First, pre-eminence over the saints; equality with the Father; and dominion over the rebellious. Pre-eminence over the saints, when it says, the Lord said to my Lord.

Yf David call him Lorde: how is he then his sonne?

And none coulde answere him ageyne one worde: nether dueste eny from that daye forth axe him eny moo questions.

For had their question sprung of desire to know, He would never have proposed to them such things as should have deterred them from asking further.

(Verse 46) And no one was able to answer him a word, nor did anyone dare from that day on to ask him any more questions. The Pharisees and Sadducees, seeking an opportunity to accuse him, and to find some word by which they could trap him, because they were confounded by his teachings, no longer questioned him, but were clearly apprehended and handed over to the Roman authoriti…

And no man was able to answer him a word. Here the effect is presented, and it is twofold, because Christ was both respondent and opponent. As opponent: no man was able to answer; Job 9:3: if he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one for a thousand.

Matthew22