The Gospel of Mark step-by-step

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES

1.) From the Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 4. The law and the prophets were signified by Moses and Elias; both bear testimony to the divinity of Jesus Christ’s mission, which was effectually to close the old, and open the new dispensation. By the apparitions of these two illustrious personages, we learn also that sometimes, though not often, there is, by the permission of heaven, a certain intercourse between the living and the dead. (Bristow)

Ver. 5. Peter had forgotten that the glorious kingdom of Christ was not of this world, but in heaven only; that himself and the other apostles, clothed as they were with their mortality, could not participate in immortal joys; and that the mansions in the house of the Father are not raised with human hands. He again shewed that he knew not what he said, by wishing to make three tabernacles, one for the law, one for the prophets, and one for the gospel, since these three cannot be separated from each other. (Ven. Bede)

2.) From the Catena Aurea:

It goes on, “And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here; and let us make three tabernacles, one for Thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.”

Bede: If the transfigured humanity of Christ and the society of but two saints seen for a moment, could confer delight to such a degree that Peter would, even by serving them, stay their departure, how great a happiness will it be to enjoy the vision of Deity amidst choirs of Angels forever?

It goes on, “For he wist not what to say;” although, however, Peter from the stupor of human frailty knew not what to say, still he gives a proof of the feelings which were within him; for the cause of his not knowing what to say, was his forgetting that the kingdom was promised to the Saints by the Lord not in any earthly region, but in heaven; he did not remember that he and his fellow Apostles were still hemmed in by mortal flesh and could not bear the state of immortal life, to which his soul had already carried him away, because in our Father’s house in heaven, a house made with hands is not needed.

But again even up to this time he is pointed at, as an ignorant man, who wishes to make three tabernacles for the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel, since they in no way can be separated from each other.

Chrys.: [ed. note: This passage is found neither in St. Chrysostom, nor in Possious’ *Catena

, nor in Peitanus’ translation of Victor: it is however in the Catena of St. Mark, edited by Dr. Cramer. As it stands in the text, a part of it is so unintelligible, that recourse has been had to the Greek.]

Again, Peter neither comprehended that the Lord worked His transfiguration for the shewing forth of His true glory, nor that He did this in order to teach men, nor that it was impossible for them to leave the multitude and dwell in the mountain.

It goes on, “For they were sore afraid.”

But this fear of theirs was one by which they were raised from their usual state of mind to one higher, and they recognised that those who appeared to them were Moses and Elias. The soul also was drawn on to a state of heavenly feeling, as though carried away from human sense by the heavenly vision.

Theophylact: Or else, Peter, fearing to come down from the mount because he had now a presentiment that Christ must be crucified, said, “It is good for us to be here,” and not to go down there, that is, in the midst of the Jews; but if they who are furious against Thee come hither, we have Moses who beat down the Egyptians, we have also Elias, who brought fire down from heaven and destroyed the five hundred.

Origen, in Matt. tom. 12, 40: Mark says in his own person, “For he wist not what to say.” Where it is matter for consideration, whether perchance Peter spoke this in the confusion of his mind, by the motion of a spirit not his own; whether perchance that spirit himself who wished, as far as in him lay, to be a stumbling block to Christ, so that He might shrink from that Passion, which was the saving of all men, did not here work as a seducer and wish under the colour of good to prevent Christ from condescending to men, from coming to them, and taking death upon Himself for their sakes.

Bede: Now because Peter sought for a material tabernacle, he was covered with the shadow of the cloud, that he might learn that in the resurrection they are to be protected not by the covering of houses, but by the glory of the Holy Ghost.

Wherefore it goes on, “There was a cloud that overshadowed them.”

And the reason why they obtained no answer from the Lord was that they asked unadvisedly; but the Father answered for the Son.

Wherefore there follows, “And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

Chrys., Hom. in Matt., 56: The voice proceeded from a cloud in which God is wont to appear, that they might believe that the voice was sent forth from God. But in that He says, “This is My beloved Son,” He declares that the will of the Father and the Son is one, and that, save in that He is the Son, He is in all things One with Him who begot Him.

Bede: He then whose preaching, as Moses foretold, every soul that wished to be saved should hear when He came in the flesh, He now come in the flesh is proclaimed by God the Father to the disciples as the one whom they were to hear.

 

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES, continued

2.) From the Catena Aurea, continued:

There follows: “And suddenly, when they had looked round about, they saw no man any more, save Jesus only with themselves;” for as soon as the Son was proclaimed, at once the servants disappeared, lest the voice of the Father should seem to have been sent forth to them.

Theophylact: Again, mystically; after the end of this world, which was made in six days, Jesus will take us up (if we be His disciples) into an high mountain, that is, into heaven, where we shall see His exceeding glory.

Bede: And by the garments of the Lord are meant His saints, who will shine with a new whiteness. By the fuller we must understand Him, to whom the Psalmist says, “Wash me thoroughly from my wickedness, and cleanse me from my sin;” (Ps 51) for He cannot give to His faithful ones upon earth that glory which remains laid up for them in heaven.

Remigius: Or else, by the fuller are meant holy preachers and purifiers of the soul, none of whom in this life can so live as not to be stained with some spots of sin; but in the coming resurrection all the saints shall be purged from every stain of sin. Therefore the Lord will make them such as neither they themselves by taking vengeance on their own members, nor any preacher by his example and doctrine, can make.

Chrys.: Or else, white garments are the writings of Evangelists and Apostles, the like to which no interpreter can frame.

Origen, in Matt. tom. 12, 39: Or else, fullers upon earth may by a moral interpretation be considered to be the wise of this world, who are thought to adorn even their foul understandings and doctrines with a false whitening drawn from their own minds. But their skill as fullers cannot produce any thing like a discourse which shews forth the brightness of spiritual conceptions in the unpolished words of Scripture, which by many are despised.

Bede: Moses and Elias, of whom one, as we read, died, the other was carried away to heaven, signify the coming glory of all the Saints, that is, of all who in the judgment time are either to be found alive in the flesh, or to be raised up from that death of which they tasted, and who are all equally to reign with Him.

Theophylact: Or else it means, that we are to see in glory both the Law and the Prophets speaking with Him, that is, we shall then find that all those things which were spoken of Him by Moses and the other prophets agree with the reality; then too we shall hear the voice of the Father, revealing to us the Son of the Father, and saying, “This is My beloved Son,” and the cloud, that is, the Holy Ghost, the fount of truth, will overshadow us.

Bede: And we must observe, that, as when the Lord was baptized in Jordan, so on the mountain, covered with brightness, the whole mystery of the Holy Trinity is declared, because we shall see in the resurrection that glory of the Trinity which we believers confess in baptism, and shall praise it all together.

Nor is it without reason that the Holy Ghost appeared here in a bright cloud, there in the form of a dove; because he who now with a simple heart keeps the faith which he hath embraced, shall then contemplate what he had believed with the brightness of open vision. But when the voice had been heard over the Son, He was found Himself alone, because when He shall have manifested Himself to His elect, God shall be all in all, yea Christ with His own, as the Head with the body, shall shine through all things. (1 Cor 15:28)

3.) Commentary by Pope St. Leo the Great (Sermon 38.5):

Excited therefore by these revelations of secret realities, the apostle Peter, spurning the mundane and loathing earthly things, was seized by a certain excess of passion toward a yearning for eternal things. Filled up with the joy of the whole vision, he wished to dwell there with Jesus where he was delighting in Christ’s manifested glory. Thus Peter said, “Lord, it is good for us to be here; if you wish, I will make three booths here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah.” But the Lord did not reply to this suggestion, for it was not wicked but inappropriate, since the world could not be saved except by Christ’s death. And in the Lord’s warning the faith of those who believe is called to account. Among the temptations of this life we should understand that we are to ask for endurance before glory. Good fortune in ruling cannot come before a time of enduring.

4.) Commentary by Apollinaris (Fragment 85):

The Father is evidently revealing the Son when the ringing voice from heaven bursts forth so loudly. Through it He reveals to everyone the testimony coming from above. One must not think the voice of God is audible. Nor can one perceive a bodiless being. Just as no one has ever seen God, so no one has ever heard God. The words “listen to Him” have the power of making a necessary distinction. For He says listen to Him, rather than to Moses or the prophet who had been introduced, because it was now time to go forward and advance from the introduction to the fulfillment, from the prefiguration to the true reality.

 

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES, continued

http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images1/transfiguration6.gif

5.) Commentary by St. Cyril of Alexandria (Fragment 199):

Through their speaking together it shows that the old prophets also spoke the same things as Jesus, even if enigmatically. In great awe the disciples fell on their faces, and the Savior raised them up. This shows that if Jesus had not been incarnate and had not been Mediator between God and humanity and strengthened His own nature, He would not have endured to hear the voice of God.

6.) Commentary by St. Jerome (Homily 80):

It seems to me that this cloud is the grace of the Holy Spirit. Naturally, a tent gives shelter and overshadows those who are within; the cloud, therefore, serves the purpose of the tents. O Peter, you who want to set up three tents, have regard for the one tent of the Holy Spirit who shelters us equally.

7.) Commentary by St. Augustine (Sermons on New Testament Lessons):

Moses was there, and Elijah. The voice did not say: These are my beloved sons. For One only is the Son; others are adopted. It is He that is commended to them: He from whom the Law and the Prophets derive their glory.

 

[patrick457]

9-10: And as they were coming down out of the mountain, He ordered them not to tell anyone what they had seen except when the Son of Man should rise from the dead. And they kept the word, discussing among themselves what ‘rising from the dead’ meant.

DEFINITIONS

Not to tell anyone: This command to silence is unusual because it is only given to three disciples and has a time limit (the only instance in Mark). Presumably this is necessary lest all the disciples think in terms of glory without the cross. Since they could not understand the significance of suffering until well after the fact, they also could not understand the character of glory until then.

Except when (ei mē otan): Many translations smooth this Greek expression by substituting “until”. Here, as in the other three Passion predictions (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34), the term “Son of Man” dominates.

And they kept the word: In the Greek, it is not clear whether logos (“word”; in this context, “matter” or “saying”) refers to the event or to Jesus’ words in 9:9. Nor is it clear whether “to themselves” belongs to what precedes (“they kept the word to themselves”) or to what follows (“discussing among themselves”, the rendering followed here).

What ‘rising from the dead’ meant: Since at least in some Jewish circles of the period (especially the Pharisees) resurrection was a prominent belief, the disciples surely would not have been hearing about it for the first time. One suggestion id that their puzzlement involved how it might happen Jesus as an individual person and before the end of the age could be raised from the dead, since the resurrection of the righteous was generally understood to be a collective and eschatological event (cf. John 11:24). Some MSS solve the problem by reading “what it means 'when He has risen from the dead”.

COMMENTARIES

1.) From the Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 9. Risen from the dead. The disciples believed the resurrection of the dead, but they knew not what Christ meant by by his rising from the dead. Their thoughts were filled with the idea of a glorious kingdom in this world, in which they should enjoy great dignities and offices under the Messias. (Witham)

2.) Commentary by St. John Chrysostom (Gospel of St. Matthew, Homily 57):

So He bound them to silence. Furthermore He spoke of His passion as though it were the reason why He asked them to be silent. Note that He did not tell them that they must never tell this to anyone. Instead they should not tell it until He had risen from the dead. In this respect He was silent as to what was painful, and spoke only of what was joyful.

 

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES, continued

3.) From the Catena Aurea:

Origen, in Matt. tom. 12, 43: After the shewing of the mystery on the mount, the Lord commanded His disciples, as they were coming down from the mount, not to reveal His transfiguration, before the glory of His Passion and Resurrection.

Wherefore it is said, “And as they came down from the mountain, He charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead.”

Chrys., Hom. in Matt., 56: Where He not only orders them to be silent, but mentioning His Passion, He implies the cause why they were to be silent.

Theophylact: Which He did lest men should be offended, hearing such glorious things of Him Whom they were about to see crucified. It was not therefore fitting to say such things of Christ before He suffered, but after His resurrection they were likely to be believed.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: But they, being ignorant of the mystery of the resurrection, took hold of that saying, and disputed one with another.

Wherefore there follows, “And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean.”

Pseudo-Jerome: This, which is peculiar to Mark, means, that when death shall have been swallowed up in victory, we shall have no memory for the former things.

 

[patrick457]

11-13: And they were asking Him, saying, “Why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” He said to them, “Elijah is indeed coming first and restores everything. And why is it written about the Son of Man that He must suffer many things and be despised? But I say to you that Elijah has certainly come and they did to him whatever they wanted, just as it is written about him.”

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/1746/elijahcd4nk6.jpg
I say to you that Elijah has certainly come and they did to him whatever they wanted…

DEFINITIONS

Why do the scribes say: The disciples’ question naturally arises out of Elijah’s appearance on the mountain, and confirms the essentially eschatological implications of the incident; a reappearance of Elijah could mean only one thing, the coming of the “day of the LORD” (Malachi 4:5). But Elijah’s coming is to be ‘before’ that day comes (Note that neither Malachi nor the disciples’ question here suggests that Elijah is to precede the Messiah; he is the herald of the “day of the LORD”).

How then does his presence on the mountain fit in with the eschatological dimension of Jesus’ ministry and the coming of the kingdom of God? The disciples’ question relates not to the ancient text of Malachi, but to current scribal teaching (legousin). For the development of the hope of the return of Elijah see especially Sirach 48:10. It is implicit in several apocalyptic texts, and features in a number of rabbinic texts which, however varied in date, attest to a continuing expectation of Elijah’s return (the belief in a return of Elijah still continues in modern-day Judaism). The disciples’ awareness of such a scribal doctrine is thus not surprising, and the experience on the mount would naturally bring it to mind.

Elijah is indeed coming first: Rather than rejecting the disciples’ eschatological scenario, Jesus accepts and interprets it further, adding His own distinctive angle to the scribal teaching. The notion that Elijah “restores everything” conveyed by apokathistanei (puts all things in order and restores them to their original condition) may by based on Malachi 4:6 (3:26 LXX): “He will turn the hearts of fathers to their sons, and the hearts of sons to their fathers.” Elijah is to prepare the people for the coming of the Lord by removing sinful division from among them. The NT accounts of John the Baptizer do not emphasize this theme, but at this point Jesus is not recounting the experiences of the new Elijah, but spelling out the content of the scribal tradition.

And why is it written about the Son of Man: Surprisingly this (rhetorical) question, on the surface, does not relate to Elijah at all, but to the Son of Man, and not to an eschatological restoration but to suffering and death. Yet this question too, like the teaching about Elijah, relates to what ‘is written’. What then is the logical connection between the two clauses? Mark resolves this by establishing two important connections: first, that the prophecy has already been fulfilled, so that the experiences of Jesus as Son of Man are part of the same sequence of events as the return of Elijah; second that (in contrast with the language of Malachi 4:5-6) ‘Elijah’'s experience has been of rejection, which does foreshadows what will happen to the Son of Man.

Mark, unlike Matthew, does not make it easier for his audience to identify John the Baptizer as Elijah by identifying him explicitly as such, but he could reasonably expect them to make the (implicit) connection, remembering that the public had already linked Jesus with both John and Elijah (6:14-15; 8:28), that it was “when John was handed over” that Jesus began His ministry (1:14), and that John’s death has been a prominent feature of Mark’s account of the buildup to the recognition of Jesus’ messianic identity and the revelation of His passion. The pieces of the puzzle are thus in place for the audience to establish the dual links first between John and Elijah and then between Elijah/John and Jesus. But the sequence of clauses is clumsy, and the effect is thus much more cryptic than Matthew’s more tidier parallel.

He must suffer many things and be despised: The use of “it is written” (gegraptai) makes explicit what was implicit in 8:31, that these things are necessary because they are part of the pattern already established in the Old Testament. This scriptural imperative applies not only to Jesus’ own future suffering but also to that of his forerunner. The audience already knows what has in fact proved to be John’s fate, but we have not hitherto been told that this aspect of his story was already ‘written’; the scriptural authentication which Mark has provided for John’s mission (1:2-3) his positive role of preparation, not on his suffering and death. The prophecy of Malachi 4:5-6 gives no hint of martyrdom, nor is this a part of the developing Jewish belief in Elijah’s return. The scriptural basis claimed in v. 13 is found not in any explicit prediction, but by a typological reading of the Elijah stories of 1 Kings 17-19, 21 (Elijah the persecuted “martyr”) as a model for what has to happen in his return.

 

[patrick457]

DEFINITIONS, continued

But I say to you that Elijah has certainly come: The disciples’ question concerned the scribal teaching about Elijah’s return. Jesus has not only endorsed that teaching, but added that the expectation has already been fulfilled, and has linked the suffering and rejection of the returning Elijah with His own. What then was the significance of Elijah’s appearance on the mountain, if Malachi’s prophecy has already been fulfilled in John the Baptist? No direct connection is made, but the perfect tense of the wording directs the disciples’ minds away from their natural assumption that what they had just witnessed was the fulfilment of the prophecy. That has already happened, and the vision on the mountain stands apart. Its significance is not in the coming of Elijah as such, but in the person of Jesus as Himself the focus of the fulfilment of Old Testament types. The brief appearance of Moses and Elijah on the mountain testifies to His eschatological role, rather than giving them a role of their own in the events now unfolding.

COMMENTARIES

1.) From the Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 10. The Jews here confound the two comings of Jesus Christ. The Baptist, in the spirit of Elias, will precede the first, and Elias in person, the second coming of Christ.

2.) From Cornelius Lapide’s Commentary:

Ver. 12. And be despised: Gr. ε̉ξουδενωθη̃, i.e., be nothing accounted of. Understand, thus shall it happen to Elias, that when by his great labours he has restored the faith, he shall in return for such great benefits receive curses and ill-treatment from the ungrateful and the impious, and shall at last be killed by them.

3.) From the Catena Aurea:

It goes on, “And they asked Him, saying, "Why say the Scribes that Elijah must first come?”

Chrys.: The design of the disciples in asking this question seems to me to be this. We indeed have seen Elijah with Thee, and have seen Thee before seeing Elijah, but the Scribes say that Elias cometh first; we therefore believe that they have lied.

Bede: Or thus; the disciples thought that the change which they had seen in Him in the mount, was His transformation to glory; and they say, If Thou hast already come in glory, wherefore doth not Thy forerunner appear? chiefly because they had seen Elijah go away.

Chrys., Hom. in Matt. 57: But what Christ answered to this, is seen by what follows, “And He answered and told them, Elijah verily cometh first, and restoreth all things;” in which He shows that Elijah will come before His second advent. For the Scriptures declare two advents of Christ, namely, one which has taken place, and another which is to come; but the Lord asserts that Elias is the forerunner of the second advent.

Bede: Again, He will restore all things, that is to say, those things which Malachi points out, saying, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet, and he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers;” [Mal 4:5-6] he will yield up also to death that debt, which by his prolonged life he has delayed to render.

Theophylact: Now the Lord puts this forward to oppose the notion of the Pharisees, who held that Elijah was the forerunner of the first advent, shewing that it led them to a false conclusion; wherefore he subjoins, “And how it is written of the Son of man, that He must suffer many things, and be set at nought.” As if He had said, When Elijah the Tishbite comes, he will pacify the Jews, and will bring them to the faith, and thus be the forerunner of the second advent.

If then Elijah is the forerunner of the first advent, how is it written that the Son of man must suffer? One of these two things therefore will follow; either that Elijah is not the forerunner of the first advent, and thus the Scripture will be true; or that he is the forerunner of the first advent, and then the Scripture will not be true, which say that Christ must suffer; for Elias must restore all things, in which case there will not be an unbelieving Jew, but all, whosoever hear him, must believe on his preaching.

Bede: Or this, “And how it is written;” that is, in the same way as the prophets have written many things in various places concerning the Passion of Christ, Elias also, when he comes, is to suffer many things, and to be despised by the wicked.

Chrys.: Now as the Lord asserted that Elijah was to be the forerunner of the second advent, so consequently He asserted that John was the forerunner of the first.

Wherefore He subjoins, “But I say unto you, that Elijah is indeed come.”

Gloss: He calls John Elijah, not because he was Elijah in person, but because he fulfilled the ministry of Elias; for as the latter will be the forerunner of the second advent, so the former has been that of the first.

Theophylact: For again, John rebuked vice, and was a zealous man, and a hermit like Elijah; but they heard him not, as they will hear Elijah, but killed him in wicked sport, and cut off his head.

Wherefore there follows, "And they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him."

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: Or else, the disciples asked Jesus, how it was written that the Son of man must suffer? Now in answer to this, He says, As John came in the likeness of Elijah, and they evil intreated him, so according to the Scriptures must the Son of man suffer.

 

[patrick457]

14-15: And when they came to the disciples, they saw a great multitude around them and scribes arguing with them. And immediately, when the whole crowd saw Him, they were greatly amazed and they were running at once and greeting Him.

PARALLELS: Matthew 17:14-21; Luke 9:37-42.

DEFINITIONS

When they came to the disciples: Most manuscripts have the verbs in the singular (“He came”…“He saw”), perhaps to make a smoother transition from 9:9-13 where Jesus is the center of attention and to provide an antecedent for auton in v. 15 and the other singular verbs which follow. The disciples include at least the other members of the Twelve and perhaps another larger group.

A great multitude: There is some tension between the references to the large crowd at the beginning (cf. 9:17) and to the crowd that came “running together” as if they were gathering for the first time in 9:25.

Scribes arguing with them: The scene seems to envision the scribes engaged in debate with Jesus’ disciples (“them”). It is hard to decide whether syntēzein should be rendered in a neutral way (“discussing” or “examining”) or polemically (“debating” or “arguing”); for other Markan uses of this verb see 1:27; 8:11; 9:10, 16; 12:28. The scribes play no further role in the story.

They were greatly amazed: The excitement of the crowd at Jesus’ arrival is conveyed by the verb ekthambein (“to be struck with terror or amazement”) which appears elsewhere in Mark with reference to Jesus’ strong emotions in Gethsemane (14:33) and to the women’s confusion at finding Jesus’ tomb empty (16:5-6). The crowd’s actions in running up to Jesus and greeting him foreshadow the actions of the rich man in 10:17.

COMMENTARIES
1.) From the Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 14. The multitude were so solicitous to see Christ that they saluted him when yet a great way off. Some imagine that the countenance of our Saviour, being rendered more beautiful by his transfiguration, attracted the attention and admiration of the people. (Theophylactus)

2.) From Cornelius Lapide’s Commentary:

Ver. 15. And presently all the people seeing Jesus, were astonished, and struck with fear: and running to Him, they saluted Him. They were astonished because they saw Jesus so unexpectedly present after His absence, and at so opportune a time, to defend His disciples against the scribes. Again, it was because they saw in the face of Jesus, who had a little while before been transfigured, some remaining rays of His splendour; just as there were in the countenance of Moses, after his converse with God, rays, and, as it were, horns of light.

3.) From the Catena Aurea:

Theophylact: After He had shown His glory in the mount to the three disciples, He returns to the other disciples, who had not come up with Him into the mount; wherefore it is said, “And when He came to His disciples, He saw a great multitude about them, and the Scribes questioning with them.”

For the Pharisees, catching the opportunity of the hour when Christ was not present, came up to them, to try to draw them over to themselves.

Pseudo-Jerome: But there is no peace for man under the sun; envy is ever slaying the little ones, and lightnings strike the tops of the great mountains. Of all those who run to the Church, some as the multitudes come in faith to learn, others, as the Scribes, with envy and pride.

It goes on, “And straightway all the people, when they beheld Jesus, were greatly amazed, and feared.”

Bede, in Marc., 3, 38: In all cases, the difference between the mind of the Scribes and of the people ought to be observed; for the Scribes are never said to have shewn any devotion, faith, humility, and reverence, but as soon as the Lord was come, the whole multitude was greatly amazed and feared, and ran up to Him, and saluted Him; wherefore there follows, “And running to Him, saluted Him.”

Theophylact: For the multitude was glad to see Him, so that they saluted Him from afar, as He was coming to them; but some suppose that His countenance had become more beautiful from His transfiguration, and that this induced the crowd to salute Him.

Pseudo-Jerome: Now it was the people, and not the disciples, who on seeing Him were amazed and feared, for there is no fear in love; fear belongs to servants, amazement to fools.

 

[patrick457]

16-18: And He asked them, “What are you arguing about with them?” And one of the multitude answered and said, “Teacher, I brought You my son who has a speechless spirit. And wherever it seizes him, it throws him down; he foams at the mouth, grinds his teeth, and becomes rigid. And I asked your disciples to cast it out, and they could not.” And answering, He says to them, “O faithless generation! How long must I be with you? How long must I put up with you? Bring him to me.”

DEFINITIONS

Them: Who “they” are is not precisely clear. In context, it could be Jesus asking the disciples what they were discussing with the scribes (9:14). But since in v. 17 a man from the crowd answers, it could also be that Jesus asks the crowd. Meanwhile, the Byzantine textual tradition and the Textus Receptus has tous grammateis (“the scribes”) in place of the first instance of autous (“them”) of the Alexandrian text (and the Vulgate), making the sentence “and He asked the scribes…”.

Teacher: So far in the gospel, Jesus has been called “Teacher” only twice (4:38; 5:35). As the narrative proceeds the title will become more and more frequent (cf. 9:38; 10:20, 35; 12:14, 19, 32; 13:1; 14:14).

A speechless spirit (pneuma alalon): The expression conveys the idea that the boy’s condition is due to demonic possession, and so he can be healed only by the expulsion of the demon or evil spirit. The spirit that possesses the boy renders him incapable of speaking and is speechless itself, a contrast to earlier exorcisms where the demons could speak (1:24; 5:7).

It is surprising to find that the demon is described as “a mute spirit.” The same characteristic is picked up by Jesus’ address to the demon in v. 25. While there is nothing improbable in this combination of problems, it is interesting that neither Matthew nor Luke mentions a speech defect, and Mark’s narrative focuses on the ‘epilectic’ symptoms than on the restoration of speech. That the boy was also mute seems to be one of those ‘irrelevant’ narrative details which Mark often preserves even though it is not where his interest is centered.

He foams at the mouth, etc.: The symptoms are described vividly and are in many ways similar to an epilectic fit, and thus many commentators have labelled the story as that of the ‘epilectic’ boy. All three evangelists however relate the story unambiguously as being an exorcism, with the boy clearly being possessed (the pneuma alalon initiates the attack and the other symptoms follow), and Mark and Luke offer no term comparable to our “epilepsy”. Matthew includes the term selēniazetai (literally “moon-struck”) which is often understood to be our epilepsy, and sometimes is even simply translated as such. But the term itself is not so specific; it denotes a condition connected to the moon (hence, the “lunaticus” of the Vulgate, and subsequently, the “lunatick” of the KJV), but it can be connected with epilepsy only by assuming that Matt. 17:14-20 actually describes an epilectic fit.

Your disciples…could not: Since Jesus was absent, the man turned to the disciples in the hope that they could also do the same deeds as Jesus. This was a legitimate assumption in light of Mark 6:7 and 13. In any event, this is the only episode in the gospel where the disciples are portrayed as impotent, unable to do what Jesus had previously empowered them to do. It is hard to doubt that their lack of power must be related in some way to their lack of belief or understanding. In this case, they do not seem to understand that the power of exorcism bestowed on them is not theirs to use at liberty; they may have thought that since the power was already given to them, it is theirs to control and did not require further reliance to God.

O faithless generation! (Ō genea apiston!) This rebuke for lack of faith has Old Testament roots (Numbers 14:27; Deuteronomy 32:5, 30; Isaiah 59:8). Deuteronomy 32:5 in turn has influenced some MSS to expand the rebuke of 9:19a to “faithless and perverted generation”.

How long (eōs pote): The repetition of this expression expresses the feelings of a Teacher who has been persistently and repeatedly misunderstood (4:40). Some also see here a hint of Jesus’ approaching death (“How long must I…”). His amazement and frustration over the unbelief of the crowds and His own disciples are already attested in 6:6 and 8:12-21.

You…you: The pronouns are in the plural, indicating that Jesus is speaking to a group rather than an individual.

COMMENTARIES
1.) Commentary by Cornelius Lapide:

Ver. 19. Troubled him. Gr. ε̉σπάραξεν, i.e., bruised, tore, convulsed his whole body. Wherefore it is added in explanation, and being thrown down upon the ground, he wallowed about foaming, because, in fact, the demon was experiencing the power of Christ, and foresaw that he would speedily be cast out, therefore with indignation and gnashing of teeth he thus grievously afflicted and tormented the energumen.

 

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES, continued

2.) From the Catena Aurea:

It goes on: “And He asked them, What question ye with them?”

Why does the Lord put this question? That confession may produce salvation, and the murmuring of our hearts may be appeased by religious works.

Bede: The question, indeed, which was raised may, if I am not deceived, have been this, wherefore they, who were the disciples of the Saviour, were unable to heal the demoniac, who was placed in the midst, which may be gathered from the following words; "And one of the multitude answered and said, “Master, I have brought unto thee my son, which hath a dumb spirit; and wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away.”

Chrys.: The Scriptures declare that this man was weak in faith, for Christ says, “O faithless generation:” and He adds, “If thou canst believe.”

But although his want of faith was the cause of their not casting out the devil, he nevertheless accuses the disciples.

Wherefore it is added, “And I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; but they could not.”

Now observe his folly; in praying to Jesus in the midst of the crowd, he accuses the disciples, wherefore the Lord before the multitude so much the more accuses him, and not only aims the accusation at himself, but also extends it to all the Jews; for it is probable that many of those present had been offended, and had held wrong thoughts concerning His disciples.

Wherefore there follows, “He answereth them and saith, O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you?” By which He shewed both that He desired death, and that it was a burden to Him to converse with them.

Bede: So far, however, is He from being angry with the person, though He reproved the sin, that He immediately added, “Bring him unto Me; and they brought him unto Him. And when He saw him, straightway the spirit tare him, and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming.”

Chrys.: But this the Lord permitted for the sake of the father of the boy, that when he saw the devil vexing his child, he might be brought on to believe that the miracle was to be wrought.

Theophylact: He also permits the child to be vexed, that in this way we might know the devil’s wickedness, who would have killed him, had he not been assisted by the Lord.

3.) Commentary by Minucius Felix (Octavius 26-27):

These spirits therefore, having lost the simplicity of their created being and the primitive fineness of their nature, are now clogged and laden with iniquity. Utterly undone themselves, they make it their whole business to undo others, for companions in misery. Being depraved themselves, they would infuse the same depravity into others…When we command them by the one true God, the wretches, bitterly against their will, fall into horrible shiverings, and either spring straightaway from the bodies they possess, or vanish by degrees, according to the faith of the patient or the grace of the physician.

4.) From the first Commentary on Mark:

The Lord knows what he asks, so that confession may produce salvation, and so that the grumbling of our heart be eased by devout words such as, Declare your iniquities beforehand, that you may be justified (Is. 43:26). fterward, we have the fourteenth miracle. One of the crowd brings forward the son with the unclean spirit, etc. The Savior cured the one whom the disciples were not able to cure. The lack of faith of both was an obstacle to the healing. The spirit torments him, foaming at the mouth, grinding his teeth and he becomes weak. The sinner foams at the mouth with foolishness; he grinds its teeth with anger; he becomes weak from sloth. The spirit torments him as he approaches salvation. Who is his food? The chosen ones, whom he wants to draw into his belly through terrors and injuries, as in the case of Job (Gregory the Great, Hom. 25 1194C-1195A; Iob 33 vii pp. 1684-1685). Jesus asks about the duration, and the father says, from infancy. Here is signified the gentile people, among which the useless cult of idols developed, so that they foolishly sacrificed their children to demons.

 

[patrick457]

19-24: And they brought him to Him. And when he saw Him, immediately the spirit convulsed him, and he fell on the ground and rolled around, foaming at the mouth. And He asked his father, “How long has this been happening to him?” And he said, “From childhood. And it has thrown him often both into fire or water to destroy him. But if you are able to do anything, have compassion on us and help us.” Then Jesus said to him, “‘If you are able’? All things are possible for him who believes!” Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, “I believe; help my unbelief!”

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/3909/00159146ps2.jpg
I believe; help my unbelief!

DEFINITIONS

And when he saw Him: As usual in describing demon possession and exorcism, Mark speaks of the agency of the demon rather than of the victim (though the latter part of the sentence describes the resultant behavior of the boy). It is the demon which ‘sees’ Jesus (through the boy’s eyes; the masculine particle idōn with the neuter subject to pneuma, “the spirit”, is presumably a constructio ad sensum) and reacts to Him immediately by convulsing the energumen. On this occasion, however, as in 7:24,30, no dialogue with the demon is recorded, only a word of command. The (mute) demon expresses its response to Jesus not verbally, but physically through the behaviour of the host.

Convulsed (sysparassō): The simple form of the verb, while originally used for a violent action such as a dog tearing up a carcass, came to be used medically for retching or convulsion, and thus seems the most likely sense here. The description of the boy rolling around on the ground foaming at the mouth is more dramatic than xērainetai (“withered”) of verse 18, but it is not difficult to understand both the convulsions and the paralytic seizure as parts of the same ‘epileptic’ condition.

But if you are able to do anything: In 1:40 the leper had apparently expressed uncertainty over Jesus’ willingness to help; this man seems to doubt His ability. If the leper’s “if you are willing” was no more than polite diffidence, the same cannot be said here. In the light of the disciples’ recent failure the father is understandably cautious in asking for deliverance even by Jesus. This is clearly a difficult case, and not even Jesus may have the power to tackle it. Even so, a little help is better than none. If that is the implication, it is hardly surprising that the man’s words draw a sharp reaction from Jesus in v. 23.

The disciples’ failure has already been implicitly attributed to unbelief, and though the explicit answer to their question in v. 29 is about prayer, the two concepts are closely related: the effectiveness of prayer depends on the faith of the one praying (11:22-24). Here, however, it is the faith of the father rather than that of the exorcist which is in question; faith is not a mechanical aid to the exorcist, but rather the attitude, or better the relationship with God, required of all concerned if the force of evil is to be defeated. Indeed, some have argued that the father of the patient is specifically included in Jesus’ complaint on v. 19, so that in vv. 21-24 we see an initial coming to faith by the supplicant.

Have compassion on us and help us: For previous uses of the highly emotional verb splanchnizesthai (“be moved with pity, have compassion”) see 1:41; 6:34; and 8:2. In each of those cases Jesus is the one who is moved with pity and shows compassion towards another. The verb boēthein (“help, come to the aid of another”) appears in Mark only here and in 9:24. The plural “us” includes at least the father and his son, and perhaps the whole family and friends.

 

[patrick457]

DEFINITIONS, continued

If you are able? Most MSS (A C3 Ψ 33 Ï) have to ei dynasai pisteusai (“if you are able to believe”), instead of to ei dynē (“if you are able”; supported by א **(“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus”) C* L N* Δ Ë1 579 892 pc). Others have ei dynē (or dynasai) pisteusai (“if you are able to believe”; so D K Θ Ë13 28 565 al), while still others have touto ei dynē (“if you can [do] this”; so Ì45] W). The reading that best explains the rise of the others is to ei dynē. The neuter article indicates that the Lord Jesus is now quoting the father who, in v. 22, says to ei dynē (“if you are able to do anything”). The article is thus used anaphorically.

However, scribes could easily have overlooked this idiom and would consequently read to ei dynē as the protasis of a conditional clause of the Lord’s statement. As such, it would almost demand the infinitive pisteusai, producing the reading to ei dynasai pisteusai (“if you are able to believe, all things are possible…”). But the article here seems to be meaningless, prompting other scribes to modify the text still further. Some dropped the nonsensical article, while others turned it into the demonstrative touto and dropped the infinitive. It is clear that scribes had difficulty with the original wording here, and made adjustments in various directions. What might not be so clear is the exact genealogy of the descent of all the readings. However, to ei dynē is both a hard saying, best explains the rise of the other readings, and is supported by the best witnesses. It thus rightly deserves to be considered authentic.

’If you are able’? The neuter of the article is sometimes used to introduce a quoted word or phrase (e.g., Mt. 19:18; Rom. 13:9; 1 Cor. 4:6?; Gal. 5:14), sometimes as here picking up a word or phrase from the preceding sentence (Gal. 4:25; Eph. 4:9; Heb. 12:27). In all other such NT uses, however, the phrase so formed takes its place in a full sentence (except in Matt. 19:18). Here a complete sentence can be found only by the rather cumbersome expedient of postulating an elliptical sense. The phrase is better taken here as syntactically independent, and read as an idiomatic exclamation, echoing the man’s tentative request in a tone of ironical rebuke. How dare he express any doubt on the matter? Grammatically it is rough but effective, but scribal attempts to smooth it out into a proper sentence suggest that the idiom was not readily recognized as acceptable syntax.

Cried out: Some MSS add “with tears” (meta dakryōn).

I believe: The Textus Receptus and some MSS have “Lord” (Kyrie); therefore the KJV “Lord, I believe…”.Because its inclusion is not very compelling, this is not even cited in the apparatus in the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th edition (NA27) or the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament, 4th edition (UBS4). Kyrios is absent in most of the significant earlier MSS (Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, etc.) and later ones as well.

Help my unbelief! The father’s cry is one of the most memorable and beloved statements in the New Testament because it captures the mixed character of faith within the experience of most people. The fact that the father brought the boy to Jesus shows some faith on his part already. But his hesitancy expressed in “if you can” shows a less perfect faith in Jesus and His power. The only previous use of apistia described the reception Jesus got in Nazareth (cf. 6:6a). Here Jesus is asking the father to move to a higher, more perfect level of faith.

 

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES

1.) From the Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 20. Let those blush who pretend to affirm, that all men come into this world clear of original sin, and perfectly innocent like Adam when first created. For why should this child be tormented by a cruel devil, if he had not been under the guilt of original sin, as it is clear, beyond dispute, that he could not be guilty of any actual transgression? (Ven. Bede)

Ver. 22. The answer of our Lord is adapted to the petition of the child’s father. He had said: If thou canst do any thing, have mercy on us: and Christ answered: If thou canst believe, &c. Thus when the leper said: If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean, he answered: I will, be thou made clean. (Ven Bede)

All things are possible to him that believeth. The sense is not, as if he that believeth could do all things; but that any thing might be done by the divine power and goodness, in favour of him that had a firm and lively faith. (Witham)

Ver. 23. If the man believed, as he said, why does he add, help my unbelief? It may be answered: because faith is manifold; their is a faith of beginners, and a faith of the perfect. The incipient faith this man already possessed, and he besought our Saviour to help him to the higher degrees of this virtue. No one becomes great and perfect all at once, but must first set off with small beginnings, and thus gradually ascend to the height of perfection. Thus the man, who, by the inspiration of grace has received imperfect faith, may be said at the same time to believe, and still to be incredulous. (Ven. Bede)

Here we are taught that our faith is weak, and has need of support and increase from God’s assistance. When tears accompany our faith, they obtain for us the grant of our petitions. (St. Jerome)

2.) From the Catena Aurea:

It goes on: “And He asked his father, How long is it ago since this come unto him? And he said, Of a child; and ofttimes it has cast him into the fire and into the waters to destroy him.”

Bede: Let Julian [ed. note: Julian was bishop of Eclanum in Campania; he was well known to St. Augustine, who before his fall speaks of him with great affection. On refusing however to agree to Pope Zosimus’ condemnation of Pelagius, he was deposed, and expelled from Italy. He wrote a great deal against St. Augustine, by whom he was refuted in works now extant. The opinion specially referred to in the text was, that Adam would have died, even though he had remained innocent, and therefore that death and sickness are not the consequences of original sin. He died in Sicily in great poverty, about A.D. 453.] blush, who dares to say that all men are born in the flesh without the infection of sin, as though they were innocent in all respects, just as Adam was when he was created.

For what was there in the boy, that he should be troubled from infancy with a cruel devil, if he were not held at all by the chain of original sin? since it is evident that he could not yet have had any sin of his own.

Gloss.: Now he expresses in the words of his petition his want of faith; for that is the reason why he adds, “But if thou canst do any thing, have compassion on us, and help us.”

For in that he says, “If thou canst do any thing,” he shews that he doubts His power, because he had seen that the disciples of Christ had failed in curing him; but he says, “have compassion on us,” to shew the misery of the sons, who suffered, and the father, who suffered with him.

It goes on: “Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.”

Pseudo-Jerome: This saying, “If thou canst,” is a proof of the freedom of the will. Again, all things are possible to him that believeth, which evidently means all those things which are prayed for with tears in the name of Jesus, that is, of salvation.

Bede: The answer of the Lord was suited to the petition; for the man said, “If thou canst do any thing, help us;” and to this the Lord answered, “If thou canst believe.” On the other hand, the leper who cried out, with faith, “Lord, if Thou will, Thou canst make me clean,” (Matt. 8:2) received an answer according to his faith, “I will, be thou clean.”

Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: His meaning is; such a plenitude of virtue is there in Me, that not only can I do this, but I will make others to have that power; wherefore if thou canst believe as thou oughtest to do, thou shalt be able to cure not only him, but many more. In this way then, He endeavoured to bring back to the faith, the man who as yet speaks unfaithfully.

 

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES, continued
2.) From the Catena Aurea, continued:

There follows, “And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.”

But if he had already believed, saying, “I believe,” how is it that he adds, “help thou mine unbelief?” We must say then that faith is manifold, that one sort of faith is elementary, another perfect; but this man, being but a beginner in believing, prayed the Saviour to add to his virtue what was wanting.

Bede: For no man at once reaches to the highest point, but in holy living a man begins with the least things that he may reach the great; for the beginning of virtue is different from the progress and the perfection of it. Because then faith mounts up through the secret inspiration of grace, by the steps of its own merits, [ed. note: This sentence of Bede may be considered to be an exposition of our Lord’s words: "*for he that hath not from him shall be taken even that which he hath.

" The connection between grace and merit, as used by the Fathers, may be illustrated from St. Thomas, their faithful disciple. He defines a meritorious operation to be one the reward of which is beyond the nature of the worker; so that merit implies the infusion of a supernatural habit, that is, of grace, not only as its efficient, but as its formal cause. Summa 1 Q62, Art 4] he who had not yet believed perfectly was at once a believer and an unbeliever.

Pseudo-Jerome: By this also we are taught that our faith is tottering, if it lean not on the stay of the help of God. But faith by its tears receives the accomplishment of its wishes.

3.) Commentary by an early-7th-century author (the first formal commentary on Mark):

So it continues: And frequently he throws him into the fire and into water (cf. Mark 9:21). For some gentiles worship fire, others water.
And Jesus says to him, If you can believe (Mark 9:22). This points to the fact of free will.
All things are possible to the one who believes (Mark 9:22). What are all things if not those which are sought, in the name of Jesus, which means “salvation”?
The father of the boy said, with tears, I believe, help my unbelief (cf. Mark 9:23). Our belief is weak, like curved planks, unless it exists joined to the strength of the help of God. Faith combined with tears gets what is prayed for, as is shown in the words, Let it be done to you according to your faith (Matt. 9:29).

4.) Commentary by St. Bede (Exposition on the Gospel of Mark, 3.9.21-22):

Lacking the premise of original sin, what possible cause can be imagined in this youth why he should since childhood have been vexed with this most fierce demonic possession? It seems clear that no actual sin of his own could have elicited this. So let the Catholic remember and confess that no one is born into this world free from the taint of the first transgression. Let him implore the grace of God through which he might be “delivered from this body of death through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (cf. Rom. 7:24)

5.) Commentary by St. Peter Chrysologus (Sermons 51):

Though it was the boy who fell on the ground, it was the devil in him who was in anguish. The possessed boy was merely convulsed, while the usurping spirit was being convicted by the awesome judge. The captive was detained, but the captor was punished. Through the wrenching of the human body, the punishment of the devil was made manifest.

6.) Commentary by St. John Cassian (Conference of Abbot Paphnutius 16):

Seeing that his faith was being driven by the waves of unbelief on the rocks which would cause a fearful shipwreck (cf. 1 Tim. 1:19), he asks of the Lord an aid to his faith, saying “Lord, help me in my unbelief.” So thoroughly did the apostles and those who live in the gospel realize that everything which is good is brought to completion by the aid of the Lord, and not imagine that they could preserve their faith unharmed by their own strength or free will, that they prayed that it might be helped and granted to them by the Lord (cf. Luke 17:5).

7.) Commentary by St. Caesarius of Arles (Sermons 12):

So great is the virtue of faith that even those who refuse to keep it still presume to praise it. Truly deservedly is faith extolled, for without it no good work is ever begun or completed.

 

[patrick457]

25-32: Now when Jesus saw that a multitude came running together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, “Speechless and deaf spirit, I command you, come out of him and never enter him again!” And it shouted, and convulsed him greatly, and came out. And he was as dead that many said, “He is dead!” But Jesus took him by the hand and lifted him up, and he arose.

And when He went into the house, His disciples were asking Him privately, “Why were we unable to cast it out?” And He said to them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer [and fasting].” And they went out from there and passed through Galilee, and He did not want anyone to know, for He was teaching His disciples and saying to them, “The Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of men; and they will kill Him, and being killed, after three days He will rise again.” But they did not understand this saying and were afraid to ask Him.

DEFINITIONS

A multitude: There is no need to assume that this is a different crowd. Either the crowd of v. 14 is still growing as new spectators arrive, or perhaps Jesus’ consultation with the father and his son has been aside from the crowd, and now people are closing in on them again.

Unclean spirit (pneuma to akatharton): The demon, formerly referred to only as “the spirit” or “the mute spirit”, is now described by Mark’s regular term, used in every account of exorcism in this gospel. This clearly marks the boy’s condition, for all its distinctive traits of dumbness and ‘epilepsy’, as one of demonic possession.

Speechless and deaf spirit: The word of command to the demon is fuller in this case than in other exorcisms, including a description of the nature of the spirit, a statement of the exorcist’s identity, and a specific command not only to leave but also not to return. The use of kōphon with alalon probably adds little, since the two words can be virtually synonymous, though kōphos may indicate that the boy was deaf as well as mute; the doubling of adjectives is typical of Mark’s prolix style of storytelling.

I command you: The inclusion of the pronoun “I” (egō) suggests that the command (unparalleled in the gospels in such a context) may not be mere redundant ‘padding’, but draws attention to the person issuing the order. The demon may have been able to resist the lesser authority of the disciples, but has now met its match (cf. the recognition of Jesus and of His authority in 1:24; 3:11; 5:7, 10). The command to come out is normal, but the addition of “and never enter him again” (kai mēketi eiseltēs eis auton) is unique in the gospels. Josephus, however, tells of the following (Antiquities 8.47):

God also enabled [Solomon] to learn that skill which expels demons, which is a science useful and sanative to men. He composed such incantations also by which distempers are alleviated. And he left behind him the manner of using exorcisms, by which they drive away demons, so that they never return; and this method of cure is of great force unto this day; for I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people that were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers.

The manner of the cure was this: He put a ring that had a Foot of one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the demoniac, after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils; and when the man fell down immediately, he abjured him to return into him no more (mēket’ eis auton epanēxein), making still mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed. And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or basin full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it, and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man…

Mt. 12:43-45 envisages the possibility of the return of an expelled demon, and the request of Legion’s demons for an alternative home (5:12) indicates the problem of homelessness for an evicted demon, hence this specific command not to return. For the father it is a much, needed reassurance that a condition which has persisted “since childhood” is now at an end.

And it shouted: For a similar description as part of an exorcism see 1:27.

And he was as dead: cf. 9:18. The departure of the demon, which has been responsible for the boy’s violent movements, leaves him inert. Unlike 1:27 where the reaction of the bystanders is amazement at the exorcism, here they think the boy was dead.

But Jesus took him by the hand: The account of Jesus’ taking his hand and raising him up echoes the language used of the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (1:31) and the raising of Jairus’ daughter (5:41-42). The language of lifting up (egeirein) evokes the idea of a ‘resurrection’ - a motif confirmed by the addition of the verb anistēmi (“arose”) immediately afterward.

And when He went into the house: The story breaks off abruptly without a triumphal ending, and the scene shifts to a house where Jesus and his disciples engage in private conversation. For other cases where Jesus explains difficult matters to the disciples in private see 4:10; 7:17; and 10:10. Here the disciples (still smarting from their public humiliation) are puzzled by their own failure to exorcise the demon: something that Jesus easily did and that Jesus had empowered them to do (6:7).

 

[patrick457]

DEFINITIONS, continued

This kind: The reference to the demon as “this kind” suggests that it possessed extraordinary force. The translation “go out” captures the active sense of the Greek verb exelthein, though the meaning is passive (“be cast out”).

But prayer: This qualification fits with the emphasis on faith in the narrative. It suggests that the disciples, too, needed greater faith to cast out the demon.

And fasting (kai nēsteia): This phrase appears in the vast majority of MSS, even early and excellent ones:

• Papyrus 45,
• Uncials (א (corrected), A, C, D, E, F, G, H, L, N, W, Θ, Σ, and Ψ)
• Minuscules (13, 33, 157, 180, 205, 565, 579, 597, 700, 892, 1006, 1010, 1071, 1241, 1243, 1292, 1342, 1424 and1505),
• Vetus Latina (Codices Vercellensis a , Stockholm Aureus aur , Veronensis b , Colbertinus c , Bezae d , Brixianus f , Corbiensis II ff2 , Vindobonensis i , Rehdigeranus l , Monacensis q , Usserianus Primus r1 )
• Latin Vulgate,
• Harclean Syriac (by Thomas of Heraclea),
• Coptic (Bohairic and Sahidic) versions,
• Georgian versions from around the 10th century (aka 2nd-stage Georgian or geo2),
• Slavonic versions.

But many present-day scholars (such as James R. Edwards) consider this to be a motivated reading due to the early Church’s emphasis on fasting (cf., e.g., 2 Clement 16:4; Polycarp to the Philippians 7:2; Didache 1:3; 7:4), and especially due to the discovery of Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, which for many tipped the scales to the other direction. A few (such as R.T. France) calls for at least the consideration of “fasting” to be in the original text, postulating that the phrase was removed by a scribe because of seemingly incoherency with the rest of Mark (cf. 2:18-19).

MSS which does not contain the phrase:

• Uncials (א (original), **(“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus”))
• Minuscules (0274, 2427)
• Vetus Latina (Bobiensis k )
• Georgian fragments and versions from the 6th-9th centuries, such as the Adysh Gospels (aka 1st-stage Georgian or geo1)

They went out from there: The location of the previous pericope was apparently at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration or at its vicinity, but since the mountain cannot be identified with any confidence, we cannot be sure as to where “there” is. The journey, which began northeast of Galilee (8:27), now continues through the familiar territory of the gospel’s first half. In this area Jesus is well known, and we might expect to hear again of crowds. But that is not now Jesus’ purpose, and He escapes recognition, presumably by avoiding areas of population as he had to do in 1:45.

In 6:31 Jesus attempted to escape public attention in order to secure rest for Himself and His disciples. In 7:24 we are not told why He sought privacy. But here Jesus’ mission is now to teach His disciples, and that takes priority over any public activity.

Teaching His disciples: The imperfect tenses, as well as the fact that this is the second of a series of three such predictions, indicate that what is stated in this verse is the continuing theme of his teaching at this stage. It is thus a reminder rather than adding anything new to what we already know from 8:31. Indeed, this is a relatively brief summary of the theme of the coming rejection, death, and resurrection of the Son of Man, stark and clear in its content, but not going into so much detail as the other two predictions.

 

[patrick457]

DEFINITIONS, continued

After three days: Mark again uses the somewhat peculiar active formula (for the NT) found also in 8:31 and 10:34. The more common divine passive formula appears in Matt 17:23 (“on the third day He will be raised”), with its more exact time calculation and divine passive construction.

They did not understand this saying: the first Passion prediction and the instructions accompanying it (8:27-9:29), it is hard to grasp why the disciples continue to be so dense (they do not even want to know). Whereas in the first case Peter at least had the courage to object to Jesus’ prediction (8:32), here the disciples do not even raise a question. Mark is suggesting that instead of profiting from Jesus’ teachings they are regressing, and thus they function as increasingly negative examples in contrast to Jesus’ positive example.

COMMENTARIES

1.) From the Haydock Commentary:

v. 31: They could not comprehend what he said; and this not so much through the dulness and stupidity of their understandings, as through their personal affection to him; and because knowing him to be God, they could not conceive how a God could die. (Nicholas of Lyra)

2.) From the Catena Aurea:

Wherefore it continues, “When Jesus saw that the multitude came running together, He rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee come out of him, and enter no more into him.”

Theophylact: The reason that He rebuked the foul spirit, when He saw the crowd running together, was that He did not wish to cure him before the multitude, that He might give us a lesson to avoid ostentation.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: And His rebuking him, and saying, “I charge thee,” is a proof of Divine power. Again, in that He says not only, “come out of him,” but also “enter no more into him,” He shews that the evil spirit was ready to enter again, because the man was weak in faith, but was prevented by the commend of the Lord.

It goes on, “And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him; and he was as one dead, insomuch that many said, He is dead.”

For the devil was not able to inflict death upon him, because the true Life was come.

Bede: But him, whom the unholy spirit made like unto death, the holy Saviour saved by the touch of His hold hand; wherefore it goes on, “But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him up, and he arose.”

Thus as the Lord had shewn Himself to be very God by the power of healing, so He shewed that He had the very nature of our flesh, by the manner of His human touch. The Manichaean [ed. note: "*Their fundamental maxim of the intrinsic evil of matter and the degraded state of mind, which their speculations on the birth after the flesh brought with it involved the denial of the Incarnation of our Lord and, as a consequence, of the reality of His whole life.

" (Note a, upon St. Augustine’s Confessions, Oxf. Tr. p. 325)] indeed madly denies that He was truly clothed in flesh; He Himself, however, by raising, cleansing, enlightening so many afflicted persons by His touch, condemned his heresy before its birth.

It goes on: “And when He was come into the house, His disciples asked Him privately, Why could not we cast him out?”

Chrys.: They feared that perchance they had lost the grace conferred upon them; for they had already received power over unclean spirits.

It goes on: “And He said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing but by prayer and fasting.”

Theophylact: That is, the whole class of lunatics, or simply, of all persons possessed with devils. Both the man to be cured, and he who cures him, should fast; for a real prayer is offered up, when fasting is joined with prayer, when he who prays is sober and not heavy with food.

Bede: Again, in a mystical sense, on high the Lord unfolds the mysteries of the kingdom to His disciples, but below He rebukes the multitude for their sins of unfaithfulness, and expels devils from those who are vexed by them. Those who are still carnal and foolish, He strengthens, teaches, punishes, whilst He more freely instructs the perfect concerning the things of eternity.

 

[patrick457]

COMMENTARIES, continued

2.) From the Catena Aurea, continued:

Theophylact: Again, this devil is deaf and dumb; deaf, because he does not choose to hear the words of God; dumb, because he is unable to teach others their duty.

Pseudo-Jerome: Again, a sinner foameth forth folly, gnasheth with anger, pineth away in sloth. But the evil spirit tears him, when coming to salvation, and in like manner those whom he would drag into his maw he tears asunder by terrors and losses, as he did Job.

Bede: For oftentimes when we try to turn to God after sin, our old enemy attacks us with new and greater snares, which he does, either to instill into us a hatred of virtue, or to avenge the injury of his expulsion.

Greg., Mor. x., 30: But he who is freed from the power of the evil spirit is thought to be dead; for whosoever has already subdued earthly desires, puts to death within himself his carnal mode of life, and appears to the world as a dead man, and many look upon him as dead; for they who know not how to live after the Spirit, think that he who does not follow after carnal pleasures is altogether dead.

Pseudo-Jerome: Further, in his being vexed from his infancy, the Gentile people is signified, from the very birth of whom the vain worship of idols arose, so that they in their folly sacrificed their children to devils. And for this reason it is said that “it cast him into the fire and into the water;” for some of the Gentiles worshipped fire, others water.

Bede: Or by this demoniac are signified those who are bound by the guilt of original sin, and coming into the world as criminals, are to be saved by grace; and by fire is meant the heat of anger, by water, the pleasures of the flesh, which melt the soul by their sweetness.

But He did not rebuke the boy, who suffered violence, but the devil, who inflicted it, because he who desires to amend a sinner, ought, whilst he exterminates his vice by rebuking and cursing it, to love and cherish the man.

Pseudo-Jerome: Again, the Lord applies to the evil spirit what he had inflicted on the man, calling him a “deaf and dumb spirit,” because he never will hear and speak what the penitent sinner can speak and hear. But the devil, quitting a man, never returns, if the man keep his heart with the keys of humility and charity, and hold possession of the gate of freedom [ed. note: of “fastness”.]. The man who was healed became as one dead, for it is said to those who are healed, “Ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.”

Theophylact: Again, when Jesus, that is, the word of the Gospel, takes hold of the hand, that is, of our powers of action, then shall we be freed from the devil. And observe that God first helps us, then it is required of us that we do good; for which reason it is said that Jesus “raised him;” in which is shewn the aid of God, and that “he arose,” in which is declared the zeal of man.

Bede: Further, our Lord, while teaching the Apostles how the worst devil is to be expelled, gives all of us rules for our life; that is, He would have us know that all the more grievous attacks of evil spirits or of men are to be overcome by fastings and prayers; and again, that the anger of the Lord, when it is kindled for vengeance on our crimes, can be appeased by this remedy alone.

But fasting in general is not only abstinence from food, but also from all carnal delights, yea, from all vicious passions. In like manner, prayer taken generally consists not only in the words by which we call upon the Divine mercy, but also in all those things which we do with the devotedness of faith in obedience to our Maker, as the Apostle testifies, when he says, “Pray without ceasing.” [Thes 5:17]

Pseudo-Jerome: Or else, the folly which is connected with the softness of the flesh, is healed by fasting; anger and laziness are healed by prayer. Each would has its own medicine, which must be applied to it; that which is used for the heel will not cure the eye; by fasting, the passions of the body, by prayer, the plagues of the soul, are healed.

Theophylact: It is after miracles that the Lord inserts a discourse concerning His Passion, lest it should be thought that He suffered because He could not help it.

Wherefore it is said, “And they departed thence, and passed through Galilee; and He would not that any man should know it. For He taught His disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill Him.”

Bede, in Marc., 1, 39: He always mingles together sorrowful and joyful things, that sorrow should not by its suddenness frighten the Apostles, but be borne by them with prepared minds.

Theophylact: After, however, saying what was sorrowful, He adds what ought to rejoice them; wherefore it goes on: “And after that He is killed, He shall rise the third day;” in order that we may learn that joys come on after struggles.

There follows: “But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask Him.”

Bede: This ignorance of the disciples proceeds not so much from slowness of intellect, as from love for the Saviour, for they were as yet carnal, and ignorant of the mystery of the cross, they could not therefore believe that He whom they had recognized as the true God, was about to die; being accustomed then to hear Him often talk in figures, and shrinking from the events of His death, they would have it that something was conveyed figuratively in those things, which He spoke openly concerning His betrayal and passion.

 

[noi4noi4]

Is there a good Catholic book on the Gospel of Mark?

 

[patrick457]

Is there a good Catholic book on the Gospel of Mark?

That’s going to be quite difficult. Historically (this was before Markan priority was hypothesized), the Gospel of Mark is merely considered as “Matthew abbreviated” and is often ignored, as Matthew and Luke often give more fuller versions of the narrative contained thereon.

However, one good (and early!) commentary on the Gospel is The First Commentary on Mark. Its original author is actually unknown (it was actually originally ascribed to St. Jerome and was both freely used by St. Thomas Aquinas and Cornelius a Lapide), but this is the very first formal commentary on Mark’s Gospel that we have. Irrespective of authorship, the text is important in the history of biblical interpretation.