:
1 And it came to pass, that when Jesus had finished these sayings, he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judaea beyond Jordan; 2 And great multitudes followed him; and he healed them there. 3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? 4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. 10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. 13 Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence. 16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. 23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. 27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore? 28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life. 30 But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:1-8
The Lord healed the multitudes beyond Jordan, where baptism was given. For all are truly healed from spiritual sickness in baptism; and many follow Christ as did these multitudes, but not rising up as Matthew, who arose and followed the Lord,

Seeing the Lord thus tempted, let none of His disciples who is set to teach think it hard if he also be by some tempted. Howbeit, He replies to His tempters with the doctrines of piety.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:1-8
Also He cures the Galileans on the borders of Judæa, that He might admit the sins of the Gentiles to that pardon which was prepared for the Jews.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:1-8
(Hom. lxii.) The Lord had before left Judæa because of their jealousy, but now He keeps Himself more to it, because His passion was near at hand. Yet does He not go up to Judæa itself, but into the borders of Judæa; whence it is said, And it came to pass when Jesus had ended all these sayings, he departed from Galilee.

It should be also observed, that the Lord is not either ever delivering doctrine, or ever working miracles, but one while does this, and again turns to that; that by His miracles faith might be given to what He said, and by His teaching might be showed the profit of those things which He wrought.

For indeed Christ so healed men, as to do good both to themselves, and through them to many other. For these men's healing was to others the occasion of their knowledge of God; but not to the Pharisees, who were only hardened by the miracles; whence it follows; And the Pharisees came to him, tempting him,, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?

Observe their wickedness even in the way of putting their question. The Lord had above disputed concerning thus law, but they now ask Him as though He had spoken nothing thereof, supposing He had forgot what He had before delivered in this matter.

But not by the law of creation only, but also by the practice of the law, He shows that they ought to be joined one and one, and never put asunder, And he said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife.

See the wisdom of the Teacher. Being asked, Is it lawful, He said not straight, It is not lawful, lest they should be troubled, but establishes it through a proof. For God made them from the beginning male and female, and not merely joined them together, but bade them quit father and mother; and not bade the husband merely approach his wife, but be joined to her, showing by this manner of speaking the inseparable bond. He even added a still closer union, saying, And they twain shall be one flesh.

When He had brought forward the words and facts of the old law, He then interprets it with authority, and lays down a law, saying, Therefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. For as those who love one another spiritually are said to be one soul, And all they that believed had one heart and one soul, (Acts 4:32.) so husband and wife who love each other after the flesh, are said to be one flesh. And as it is a wretched thing to cut the flesh, so is it an unjust thing to put away a wife.

He brings in God yet again, saying, What God has joined, let no man put asunder, showing that it is against both nature and God's law to put away a wife; against nature, because one flesh is therein divided; against law, because God has joined and forbidden to sunder them.

Had the Lord been opposed to the Old Testament, He would not thus have contended in Moses' behalf, nor have gone about to show that what was his was in agreement with the things of old. But the unspeakable wisdom of Christ made answer and excuse for these in this manner, He saith unto them, Moses for the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives. By this He clears Moses from their charge, and retorts it all upon their own head.

At last, because what He had said was severe, He goes back to the old law, saying, From the beginning it was not so.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:1
Having constantly left Judæa on account of the envy of those men, now He frequents it from this time forth, because the passion was to be near at hand; He goes not up, however, unto Jerusalem for a while, but into the coasts of Judæa.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:1
He had often before left Judea because of the people’s hostility. Now he returned there at last, as the time of his Passion was near. But he did not go up to Jerusalem yet, but to the borders of Judea.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 62.1
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:1-8
That they might have Him as it were between the horns of a syllogism, so that, whatever answer He should make, it would lie open to cavil. Should He allow a wife to be put away for any cause, and the marriage of another, he would seem to contradict Himself as a preacher of chastity. Should He answer that she may not be put away for any cause whatsoever, He will be judged to have spoken impiously, and to make against the teaching of Moses and of God.

But He so frames His answer as to evade their snare. He brings in the testimony of Holy Writ, and the law of nature, and opposing God's first sentence to this second, He answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female? This is written in the beginning of Genesis. This teaches that second marriages are to be avoided, for He said not male and females, which was what was sought by the putting away of the first, but, male and female, implying only one tie of wedlock.

In like manner He says his wife, and not wives, and adds expressly, and they twain shall be one flesh. For it is the reward of marriage that one flesh, namely in the offspring, is made of two.

God has joined by making man and woman one flesh; this then man may not put asunder, but God only. Man puts asunder, when from desire of a second wife the first is put away; God puts asunder, who also had joined, when by consent for the service of God we so have our wives as though we had them not. (1 Cor. 7:29.)

Here they reveal the cavil which they had prepared; albeit the Lord had not given sentence of Himself, but had recalled to their minds ancient history, and the commands of God.

What He says is to this purpose. Is it possible that God should so contradict Himself, as to command one thing at first, and after defeat His own ordinance by a new statute? Think not so; but, whereas Moses saw that through desire of second wives who should be richer, younger, or fairer, that the first were put to death, or treated ill, he chose rather to suffer separation, than the continuance of hatred and assassination. Observe moreover that He said not God suffered you, but, Moses; showing that it was, as the Apostle speaks, a counsel of man, not a command of God. (1 Cor. 7:12.)

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:1-3
(Chapter XIX. — Verse 1 and following) And it came to pass when Jesus had finished these sayings, he departed from Galilee and came into the borders of Judea, beyond the Jordan; and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them there. And the Pharisees came to him, tempting him and saying: Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause? He had come from Galilee to Judea; therefore, the faction of the Pharisees and Scribes questioned him, whether it is lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause, so that they may hold him in a trap as if he were caught in a syllogism, and whatever he answers, may be used against him. If he says that wives should be dismissed for any reason whatsoever, and other wives should be taken, he will appear to preach against chastity. But if he responds that not every reason warrants dismissal, he will be held guilty of sacrilege as if he were a transgressor of the law given through Moses and by Moses from God. Therefore, the Lord tempers his response so that their disciple may understand, citing sacred Scripture as evidence and opposing the natural law and the first intention of God with the second intention, which was granted not by the will of God but by the necessity of sinners.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Matthew 19:1-8
(Gen. ad lit. ix. 19.) Whereas Scripture witnesses that these words were said by the first man, and the Lord here declares that God spake them, hence we should understand that by reason of the ecstasy which had passed upon Adam, he was enabled to speak this as a prophecy.

(Civ. Dei, xiv. 22.) For they are called one, either from their union, or from the derivation of the woman, who was taken out of the side of the man.

(Cont. Faust. xix. 29.) Behold now out of the books of Moses it is proved to the Jews that a wife may not be put away. For they thought that they were doing according to the purport of Moses' law when they did put them away. This also we learn hence by the testimony of Christ Himself, that it was God who made it thus, and joined them male and female; which when the Manichæans deny, they are condemned, resisting the Gospel of Christ.

(ubi sup.) For how great was that hardness! When not even the intervention of a bill of divorce, which gave room for just and prudent men to endeavour to dissuade, could move them to renew the conjugal affection. And with what wit do the Manichæans blame Moses, as severing wedlock by a bill of divorce, and commend Christ as, on the contrary, confirming its force? Whereas according to their impious science they should have praised Moses for putting asunder what the devil had joined, and found fault with Christ who riveted the bonds of the devil.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 533] Remigius of Rheims on Matthew 19:1-8
The Apostle says that this is a mystery in Christ and the Church (Eph. 5:32.); for the Lord Jesus Christ left His Father when He came down from heaven to earth; and He left His mother, that is, the synagogue, because of its unbelief, and clave unto His wife, that is, the Holy Church, and they two are one flesh, that is, Christ and the Church are one body.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Matthew 19:1-8
Here then He begins to relate what He did, taught, or suffered in Judæa. At first beyond Jordan eastward, afterwards on this side Jordan when He came to Jericho, Bethphage, and Jerusalem; whence it follows, And He came into the coasts of Judæa beyond Jordan.

It should be known, that the whole territory of the Israelites was called Judæa, to distinguish it from other nations. But its southern portion, inhabited by the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, was called Judæa proper, to distinguish it from other districts in the same province as Samaria, Galilee, Decapolis, and the rest. It follows, And great multitudes followed him.

For by the wholesome design of God it was ordained that a man should have in the woman a part of his own body, and should not look upon as separate from himself that which he knew was formed out of himself.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1274] Pseudo-Chrysostom on Matthew 19:1-8
PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM.e. As the righteous Lord of all, who loves these servants so as not to despise those.

They were conducting Him forth, as the young children of a father going on a far journey. And He setting forth as a father, left them as pledges of His love the healing of their diseases, as it is said, And he healed them.

But, as when you see one much pursuing the acquaintance of physicians, you know that he is sick, so, when you see either man or woman enquiring concerning divorce, know that that man is lustful and that woman unchaste. For chastity has pleasure in wedlock, but desire is tormented as though under a slavish bondage therein. And knowing that they had no sufficient cause to allege for their putting away their wives, save their own lewdness, they feigned many divers causes. They feared to ask Him for what cause, lest they should be tied down within the limits of fixed and certain causes; and therefore they asked if it were lawful for every cause; for they knew that appetite knows no limits, and cannot hold itself within the bounds of one marriage, but the more it is indulged the more it is kindled.

If then God created the male and female out of one, to this end that they should be one, why then henceforth were not they born man and wife at one birth, as it is with certain insects? Because God created male and female for the continuance of the species, yet is He ever a lover of chastity, and promoter of continence. Therefore did He not follow this pattern in all kinds, to the end that, if any man choose to marry, he may know what is, according to the first disposition of the creation, the condition of man and wife; but if he choose not to marry, he shall not be under necessity to marry by the circumstances of his birth, lest he should by his continence be the destruction of the other who was not willing to be continent; for which same cause God forbids that after being joined in wedlock one should separate if the other be unwilling.

If then because the wife is made of the man, and both one of one flesh, a man shall leave his father and his mother, then there should be yet greater affection between brothers and sisters, for these come of the same parents, but man and wife of different. But this is saying too much, because the ordinance of God is of more force than the law of nature. For God's precepts are not subject to the law of nature, but nature bends to the precepts of God. Also brethren are born of one, that they should seek out different roads; but the man and the wife are born of different persons, that they should coalesce in one. The order of nature also follows the appointment of God. For as is the sap in trees, so is affection in man. The sap ascends from the roots into the leaves, and passes forth into the seed. Therefore parents love their children, but are not so loved of them, for the desire of a man is not towards his parents, but towards the sons whom he has begot; and this is what is said, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife.

This sentence of chastity seemed hard to these adulterers; but they could not make answer to the argument. Howbeit, they will not submit to the truth, but betake themselves for shelter to Moses, as men having a bad cause fly to some powerful personage, that where justice is not, his countenance may prevail; They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?

Therefore said He well, Moses suffered, not commanded. For what we command, that we ever wish; but when we suffer, we yield against our will, because we have not the power to put full restraint upon the evil wills of men. He therefore suffered you to do evil that you might not do worse; thus in suffering this he was not enforcing the righteousness of God, but taking away its sinfulness from a sin; that while you did it according to His law, your sin should not appear sin.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1274] Glossa Ordinaria on Matthew 19:1-8
(interlin.) Or, one flesh, that is in carnal connection.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:2
Note that there is a distinction here between the crowds who simply followed and Peter and the others who “left everything and followed” and Matthew, who arose and followed him—he did not simply follow but “having arisen”; for “having arisen” is an important addition. There are always those, then, who follow at a distance like the great multitudes yet who have not arisen that they may follow, nor have they given up all that was theirs formerly. But they are few who have arisen and followed, who also, in the regeneration, shall sit on twelve thrones. Only, if one wishes to be healed, let him follow Jesus.

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 14.15
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:2
For neither in the teaching by words does He continue always, nor in the wonderful working of signs, but He does now one now the other, variously working the salvation of them that were waiting upon Him and following Him, so as by the miracles to appear, in what He said, a Teacher worthy of belief, and by the teaching of His word to increase the profit from the miracles; and this was to lead them by the hand to the knowledge of God.

But do thou mark, I pray you, this too, how the disciples pass over whole multitudes with one word, not declaring by name each of them that are healed. For they said not, that such a one, and such another, but that many, teaching us to be unostentatious. But Christ healed, benefiting both them, and by them many others. For the healing of these men's infirmity was to others a foundation for the knowledge of God.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:2
Entering Judea, “large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.” And he did not spend all his time either teaching or performing miracles, but at one time taught, at another time healed. Thus Jesus worked for the salvation of those remaining close by him and following him, so as through the miracles to appear, in what he said, a teacher worthy of belief, and to add the gain coming from the miracles to the teaching of his words. In this way he was leading them by the hand to the knowledge of God. But look at this with me. See how the disciples treat briefly whole multitudes in one word, not recording by name all the individuals who were healed. For they did not say “so and so, and so and so” but “many,” teaching us not to be boastful. Christ healed them, benefiting them and through them many others. For the healing of their sickness becomes for others the moment of recognition of God.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 62.1
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:2
. Again He sojourns in Judea so as not to give the unbelievers in Judea any excuse to say, "He did not visit us frequently, as He did the Galileans." Once again, when the teaching and the speaking are finished, the miracles follow, for we must both teach and act. When the mindless Pharisees saw the miracles, they ought to have believed, but instead they put Him to the test. Hear, then:
[AD 160] Shepherd of Hermas on Matthew 19:3-9
"Sir, if any one has a wife who trusts in the Lord, and if he detect her in adultery, does the man sin if he continue to live with her?" And he said to me, "As long as he remains ignorant of her sin, the husband commits no transgression in living with her. But if the husband know that his wife has gone astray, and if the woman does not repent, but persists in her fornication, and yet the husband continues to live with her, he also is guilty of her crime, and a sharer in her adultery." And I said to him, "What then, sir, is the husband to do, if his wife continue in her vicious practices?" And he said, "The husband should put her away, and remain by himself. But if he put his wife away and marry another, he also commits adultery." And I said to him, "What if the woman put away should repent, and wish to return to her husband: shall she not be taken back by her husband?" And he said to me, "Assuredly. If the husband do not take her back, he sins, and brings a great sin upon himself; for he ought to take back the sinner who has repented. But not frequently. For there is but one repentance to the servants of God. In case, therefore, that the divorced wife may repent, the husband ought not to marry another, when his wife has been put away. In this matter man and woman are to be treated exactly in the same way... And I said, "If a wife or husband die, and the widower or widow marry, does he or she commit sin?" "There is no sin in marrying again," said he; "but if they remain unmarried, they gain greater honour and glory with the Lord; but if they marry, they do not sin."

Source: The Shepherd of Hermas (Book II), Commandment 4, Chapters 1 & 4
[AD 165] Justin Martyr on Matthew 19:3-9
"Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced from another husband, commits adultery." [Matthew 5:32] ... So that all who, by human law, are twice married, are in the eye of our Master sinners.

Source: The First Apology, Chapter 15
[AD 185] Theophilus of Antioch on Matthew 19:3-9
And the voice of the Gospel teaches still more urgently concerning chastity, saying: "Whosoever looks on a woman who is not his own wife, to lust after her, has committed adultery with her already in his heart." [Matthew 5:28] "And he that marries," says [the Gospel], "her that is divorced from her husband, commits adultery; and whosoever puts away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery." [Matthew 5:32] Because Solomon says: "Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned? Or can one walk upon hot coals, and his feet not be burned? So he that goes in to a married woman shall not be innocent." [Proverbs 6:27-29]

Source: To Autolycus, Book III, Chapter 13
[AD 190] Athenagoras of Athens on Matthew 19:3-9
A person should either remain as he was born, or be content with one marriage; for a second marriage is only a specious adultery. "For whosoever puts away his wife," says He, "and marries another, commits adultery;" [Matthew 19:9] not permitting a man to send her away whose virginity he has brought to an end, nor to marry again. For he who deprives himself of his first wife, even though she be dead, is a cloaked adulterer, resisting the hand of God, because in the beginning God made one man and one woman, and dissolving the strictest union of flesh with flesh, formed for the intercourse of the race.

Source: A Plea for the Christians
[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Matthew 19:3-12
“Not all can receive this saying. There are some eunuchs who were born so, and some who were made eunuchs by men, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven; let him receive it who can receive it,” they do not realize the context. After his word about divorce some asked him whether, if that is the position in relation to woman, it is better not to marry; and it was then that the Lord said: “Not all can receive this saying, but those to whom it is granted.” What the questioners wanted to know was whether, when a man’s wife has been condemned for fornication, it is allowable for him to marry another

Source: The Stromata (Book III), Chapter 6
[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Matthew 19:3-9
Now that the Scripture counsels marriage, and allows no release from the union, is expressly contained in the law, "You shall not put away your wife, except for the cause of fornication;" and it regards as fornication, the marriage of those separated while the other is alive. Not to deck and adorn herself beyond what is becoming, renders a wife free of calumnious suspicion, while she devotes herself assiduously to prayers and supplications; avoiding frequent departures from the house, and shutting herself up as far as possible from the view of all not related to her, and deeming housekeeping of more consequence than impertinent trifling. "He that takes a woman that has been put away," it is said, "commits adultery; and if one puts away his wife, he makes her an adulteress," that is, compels her to commit adultery. And not only is he who puts her away guilty of this, but he who takes her, by giving to the woman the opportunity of sinning; for did he not take her, she would return to her husband. What, then, is the law? [Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22] In order to check the impetuosity of the passions, it commands the adulteress to be put to death, on being convicted of this; and if of priestly family, to be committed to the flames. [Leviticus 21:9] And the adulterer also is stoned to death, but not in the same place, that not even their death may be in common. And the law is not at variance with the Gospel, but agrees with it. How should it be otherwise, one Lord being the author of both? She who has committed fornication lives in sin, and is dead to the commandments; but she who has repented, being as it were born again by the change in her life, has a regeneration of life; the old harlot being dead, and she who has been regenerated by repentance having come back again to life. The Spirit testifies to what has been said by Ezekiel, declaring, "I desire not the death of the sinner, but that he should turn." [Ezekiel 33:11] Now they are stoned to death; as through hardness of heart dead to the law which they believed not. But in the case of a priestess the punishment is increased, because "to whom much is given, from him shall more be required." [Luke 12:48]

Source: The Stromata (Book II), Chapter 24
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:3
But grant that these argumentations may be thought to be forced and founded on conjectures, if no dogmatic teachings have stood parallel with them which the Lord uttered in treating of divorce, which, permitted formerly, He now prohibits, first because "from the beginning it was not so," like plurality of marriage; secondly, because "What God hath conjoined, man shall not separate," -for fear, namely, that he contravene the Lord: for He alone shall "separate" who has "conjoined" (separate, moreover, not through the harshness of divorce, which (harshness) He censures and restrains, but through the debt of death) if, indeed, "one of two sparrows falleth not on the ground without the Father's will.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:3-9
But perhaps some Jewish man of those who dare to oppose the teaching of our Saviour will say, that when Jesus said, "Whosoever shall put away his own wife, saving for the cause of fornication, makes her an adulteress," [Matthew 5:32] He also gave permission to put away a wife like as well as Moses did, who was said by Him to have given laws for the hardness of heart of the people, and will hold that the saying, "Because he found in her an unseemly thing," [Deuteronomy 24:1] is to be reckoned as the same as fornication on account of which with good cause a wife could be cast away from her husband. But to him it must be said that, if she who committed adultery was according to the law to be stoned, clearly it is not in this sense that the unseemly thing is to be understood. For it is not necessary for adultery or any such great indecency to write a bill of divorcement and give it into the hands of the wife; but indeed perhaps Moses called every sin an unseemly thing, on the discovery of which by the husband in the wife, as not finding favour in the eyes of her husband, the bill of divorcement is written, and the wife is sent away from the house of her husband; "but from the beginning it has not been so." [Matthew 19:8] After this our Saviour says, not at all permitting the dissolution of marriages for any other sin than fornication alone, when detected in the wife, "Whosoever shall put away his own wife, saving for the cause of fornication, makes her an adulteress." [Matthew 5:32] But it might be a subject for inquiry if on this account He hinders any one putting away a wife, unless she be caught in fornication, for any other reason, as for example for poisoning, or for the destruction during the absence of her husband from home of an infant born to them, or for any form of murder whatsoever. And further, if she were found despoiling and pillaging the house of her husband, though she was not guilty of fornication, one might ask if he would with reason cast away such an one, seeing that the Saviour forbids any one to put away his own wife saving for the cause of fornication. In either case there appears to be something monstrous, whether it be really monstrous, I do not know; for to endure sins of such heinousness which seem to be worse than adultery or fornication, will appear to be irrational; but again on the other hand to act contrary to the design of the teaching of the Saviour, every one would acknowledge to be impious. I wonder therefore why He did not say, Let no one put away his own wife saving for the cause of fornication, but says, "Whosoever shall put away his own wife, saving for the cause of fornication, makes her an adulteress." [Matthew 5:32] For confessedly he who puts away his wife when she is not a fornicator, makes her an adulteress, so far as it lies with him, for if, "when the husband is living she shall be called an adulteress if she be joined to another man;" [Romans 7:3] and when by putting her away, he gives to her the excuse of a second marriage, very plainly in this way he makes her an adulteress. But as to whether her being caught in the act of poisoning or committing murder, furnishes any defense of his dismissal of her, you can inquire yourselves; for the husband can also in other ways than by putting her away cause his own wife to commit adultery; as, for example, allowing her to do what she wishes beyond what is fitting, and stooping to friendship with what men she wishes, for often from the simplicity of husbands such false steps happen to wives; but whether there is a ground of defense or not for such husbands in the case of such false steps, you will inquire carefully, and deliver your opinion also in regard to the difficult questions raised by us on the passage. And even he who withholds himself from his wife makes her oftentimes to be an adulteress when he does not satisfy her desires, even though he does so under the appearance of greater gravity and self-control. And perhaps this man is more culpable who, so far as it rests with him, makes her an adulteress when he does not satisfy her desires than he who, for other reason than fornication, has sent her away — for poisoning or murder or any of the most grievous sins. But as a woman is an adulteress, even though she seem to be married to a man, while the former husband is still living, so also the man who seems to marry her who has been put away, does not so much marry her as commit adultery with her according to the declaration of our Saviour.

Source: Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XIV), Section 24
[AD 380] Apostolic Constitutions on Matthew 19:3-9
If a layman divorces his own wife, and takes another, or one divorced by another, let him be suspended.

Source: Apostolic Constitutions (Book VIII), The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Same Holy Apostles, Section 48
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:3
But not so to the Pharisees, but even for this self-same thing they become more fierce, and come unto Him tempting Him. For because they could not lay hold of the works that were doing, they propose to Him questions.

O folly! They thought to silence Him by their questions, although they had already received certain proof of this power in Him. When at least they argued much about the Sabbath, when they said, He blasphemes, when they said, He has a devil, when they found fault with His disciples as they were walking in the grain fields, when they argued about unwashen hands, on every occasion having sewed fast their mouths, and shut up their shameless tongue, He thus sent them away. Nevertheless, not even so do they keep off from Him. For such is wickedness, such is envy, shameless and bold; though it be put to silence ten thousand times, ten thousand times does it assault again.

But mark thou, I pray you, their craft also from the form of their question. For neither did they say unto Him, You commanded not to put away a wife, for indeed He had already discoursed about this law; but never theless they made no mention of those words; but took occasion from hence, and thinking to make their snare the greater, and being minded to drive Him to a necessity of contradicting the law, they say not, why did You enact this or that? But as though nothing had been said, they ask, Is it lawful? expecting that He had forgotten having said it; and being ready if on the one hand He said, It is lawful to put away, to bring against Him the things He Himself had spoken, and to say, How then did You affirm the contrary? But if the same things now again as before, to bring against Him the words of Moses.

What then said He? He said not, do you tempt me, you hypocrites? although afterwards He says this, but here He speaks not thus. Why can this be? In order that together with His power He might show forth His gentleness also. For He does neither always keep silence, lest they should suppose they are hidden; nor does He always reprove, in order that He may instruct us to bear all things with gentleness.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:3
Note their craftiness from the very form of their questioning. They did not say to him, “You told him not to dismiss his wife,” for he had already spoken about this law. They did not mention those words but started off from that point. Thinking to make the ambush greater and wanting to trap him into saying something against the law, they did not say, “Why did you command such and such?” But, as if nothing had been said, they asked, “Is it lawful?” expecting that he would have forgotten what he had said. And they were ready if … he said, “It is lawful to put away,” to bring against him the things he himself had spoken and to say, “Why did you say the opposite?” And if he repeated what he had earlier said, they were ready to challenge him with the words of Moses.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 62.1
[AD 1963] CS Lewis on Matthew 19:3-6
The Christian idea of marriage is based on Christ's words that a man and wife are to be regarded as a single organism - for that is what the words 'one flesh' would be in modern English. And the Christians believe that when He said this He was not expressing a sentiment but stating a fact - just as one is stating a fact when one says that a lock and its key are one mechanism, or that a violin and a bow are one musical instrument. The inventor of the human machine was telling us that its two halves, the male and the female, were made to be combined together in pairs, not simply on the sexual level, but totally combined. The monstrosity of sexual intercourse outside marriage is that those who indulge in it are trying to isolate one kind of union (the sexual) from all the other kinds of union which were intended to go along with it and make up the total union. The Christian attitude does not mean that there is anything wrong about sexual pleasure, any more than about the pleasure of eating. It means that you must not isolate that pleasure and try to get it by itself, any more than you ought to try to get the pleasures of taste without swallowing and digesting, by chewing things and spitting them out again.

Source: Mere Christianity, Chapter 6 - Christian Marriage
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:4
There, while prohibiting divorce, He has given us a solution of this special question respecting it: "Moses," says He, "because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to give a bill of divorcement; but from the beginning it was not so" -for this reason, indeed, because He who had "made them male and female" had likewise said, "They twain shall become one flesh; what therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Now, by this answer of His (to the Pharisees), He both sanctioned the provision of Moses, who was His own (servant), and restored to its primitive purpose the institution of the Creator, whose Christ He was.

Source: Against Marcion Book IV
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:4
See a teacher's wisdom. I mean, that being asked, Is it lawful? He did not at once say, It is not lawful, lest they should be disturbed and put in disorder, but before the decision by His argument He rendered this manifest, showing that it is itself too the commandment of His Father, and that not in opposition to Moses did He enjoin these things, but in full agreement with him.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:4
Look carefully at the wisdom of the teacher. For being asked, “Is it allowed?” he does not immediately say, “It is not allowed,” lest they should be disturbed and break out in an uproar. Before Jesus made his own statement he made it clear through his opening remarks that what he had to say came from his Father’s commandment. In commanding this he was not in opposition to Moses but fully in agreement with him. Notice how he validates covenant sexuality not from the creation alone but from God’s commandment. For he did not say that God had made only one man and one woman but that God had also commanded that the one man should be joined to the one woman.If God had wanted Adam to dismiss this wife and marry another, when he made one man, he would have made many women. But as it is, he shows both by the manner of her creation and the form of the commandment that one man must dwell with one woman continually and never break off from her. And see how he says, “He who made them at the beginning made them male and female,” that is, they sprang from one root and came together as one body, “or the two shall be one flesh.”

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 62.1
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:4
(V. 4.) And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female? This is written in the beginning of Genesis. But in saying male and female, he pointed towards monogamous marriages. For he did not say males and females, which was sought after due to the repudiation of the former, but male and female, so that the bond of one spouse might be established.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:5
Let them see to that, who, among the rest of their perversities, teach the disjoining of the "one flesh in twain; " denying Him who, after borrowing the female from the male, recombined between themselves, in the matrimonial computation, the two bodies taken out of the consortship of the self-same material substance.

Source: To His Wife Book I
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:5
What kind of yoke is that of two believers, (partakers) of one hope, one desire, one discipline, one and the same service? Both (are) brethren, both fellow servants, no difference of spirit or of flesh; nay, (they are) truly "two in one flesh." Where the flesh is one, one is the spirit ton.

Source: To His Wife Book II
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:5-6
The apostle understands “the two shall become one flesh,” as referring to Christ and the church. So we must say that Christ did not dismiss the former (so to speak) wife, that is, the former synagogue, for any other cause than that the wife committed fornication, being made an adulteress by the evil one. Along with him she plotted against her husband and gave him over to death, saying, “Away with such a fellow from the earth, crucify him, crucify him.”It was she, the synagogue, therefore who left him, rather than that her husband divorced her and sent her away. Therefore it says in Isaiah, rebuking her for this divorce: “Where is your mother’s bill of divorce, with which I put her away?”

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 14.17
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:5
But mark Him arguing strongly not from the creation only, but also from His command. For He said not, that He made one man and one woman only, but that He also gave this command that the one man should be joined to the one woman. But if it had been His will that he should put this one away, and bring in another, when He had made one man, He would have formed many women.

But now both by the manner of the creation, and by the manner of lawgiving, He showed that one man must dwell with one woman continually, and never break off from her.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:5-6
Then he showed that it is a fearful thing to tamper with this law. When establishing this law, he did not say, “Therefore, do not sever or separate” but “What God has joined together, let man not separate.” If you quote Moses, I will quote the God of Moses, and with him I am always strong. For God from the beginning made them male and female. This law is very old, even if it appears human beings have recently discovered it. It is firmly fixed. And God did not simply bring the woman to her husband but ordered her also to leave her father and mother. And he not only ordered the man to go to the woman but also to cling to her, showing by his way of speaking that they could not be separated. And not even with this was God satisfied, but he sought also for another greater union: “for the two shall be one flesh.”

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 62.1
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:5-6
“What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” God “has joined” in making one flesh of man and woman; this no man can put asunder, unless perhaps God alone. Man “puts asunder” when we dismiss our first wife in desire of a second; God, who also had joined together, puts asunder, when by consent for God’s service, we so have our wives as though not having them.

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 1.19.6
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:5-6
(Vers. 5, 6.) And he said: Because of this, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Likewise, he said, a man must be united to his wife, not wives. And the two will become one flesh. The reward of marriage is for two to become one flesh. Chastity joined to the spirit makes one spirit.

Therefore, what God has joined together, let no man separate. God has joined, by making one flesh of man and woman: this the man cannot separate, unless perhaps by the power of God alone. Man separates, when, due to desire for a second spouse, he dismisses the first. God separates, who had also joined, when by consent due to the service of God (because time is limited) we have wives as though we have none (I Cor. VII).

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:6
And accordingly, those whom God "from the beginning" conjoined, "two into one flesh," man shall not at the present day separate. The apostle, too, writing to the Ephesians, says that God "had proposed in Himself, at the dispensation of the fulfilment of the times, to recall to the head" (that is, to the beginning) "things universal in Christ, which are above the heavens and above the earth in Him.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:6
And see how He says, He which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, that is, from one root they sprung, and into one body came they together, for the two shall be one flesh.

After this, to make it a fearful thing to find fault with this lawgiving, and to confirm the law, He said not, Sever not therefore, nor put asunder, but, What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:6
. O what mindlessness! They thought they would confound Christ by their questions, for if He said it was lawful to divorce one’s wife for any reason, they would say to Him, "Why then did you say, Let not a man divorce his wife unless only she be an adulteress?" (Mt. 5:32). But if He said it was not lawful for a man to divorce his wife they would slander Him as a lawgiver at variance with Moses. For Moses had decreed that if a man hated his wife he should divorce her even without reasonable cause (Deut. 24:3). What then does Christ say? He shows that monogamy is the work and law of Him Who created us at the beginning. For at the beginning, He says, God joined together one man and one woman. So it is not right that one man should be joined to many women, or one woman to many men. But as they were joined together at the beginning, so they should remain, not sundering the marital union without good cause. Jesus did not say, "It is I Who made them male and female," not wanting to vex the Pharisees; but He phrased it more indefinitely, "He Who made them." The goodness of wedded union is of such importance to God that He even permitted women to leave their parents and to cleave to their husbands. But why is it written in Genesis (Gen. 2:24) that Adam said, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother," while here Christ says that it was God Who said, "For this cause shall a man leave father and mother." We say, therefore, that what Adam spoke, he spoke from God, so that the speech of Adam is of God. Therefore, since they have become one flesh, joined together by means of marital relations and physical affection, just as it is accursed to cut one’s own flesh, so is it accursed to separate husband and wife. He did not say, "Let not Moses put asunder," so as not to scandalize them, but simply "Let not man," showing the gap between God Who joins together and man who dissolves.
[AD 1973] JRR Tolkien on Matthew 19:6-9
A man's dealings with women can be purely physical (they cannot really, of course: but I mean he can refuse to take other things into account, to the great damage of his soul (and body) and theirs); or 'friendly'; or he can be a 'lover' (engaging and blending all his affections and powers of mind and body in a complex emotion powerfully coloured and energized by 'sex'). This is a fallen world. The dislocation of sex-instinct is one of the chief symptoms of the Fall. The world has been 'going to the bad' all down the ages. The various social forms shift, and each new mode has its special dangers: but the 'hard spirit of concupiscence' has walked down every street, and sat leering in every house, since Adam fell. We will leave aside the 'immoral' results. These you desire not to be dragged into. To renunciation you have no call. 'Friendship' then? In this fallen world the 'friendship' that should be possible between all human beings, is virtually impossible between man and woman. The devil is endlessly ingenious, and sex is his favourite subject. He is as good every bit at catching you through generous romantic or tender motives, as through baser or more animal ones. This 'friendship' has often been tried: one side or the other nearly always fails. Later in life when sex cools down, it may be possible. It may happen between saints. To ordinary folk it can only rarely occur: two minds that have really a primarily mental and spiritual affinity may by accident reside in a male and a female body, and yet may desire and achieve a 'friendship' quite independent of sex. But no one can count on it. The other partner will let him (or her) down, almost certainly, by 'falling in love'. But a young man does not really (as a rule) want 'friendship', even if he says he does. There are plenty of young men (as a rule). He wants love: innocent, and yet irresponsible perhaps. Allas! Allas! that ever love was sinne! as Chaucer says. Then if he is a Christian and is aware that there is such a thing as sin, he wants to know what to do about it.

There is in our Western culture the romantic chivalric tradition still strong, though as a product of Christendom (yet by no means the same as Christian ethics) the times are inimical to it. It idealizes 'love' — and as far as it goes can be very good, since it takes in far more than physical pleasure, and enjoins if not purity, at least fidelity, and so self-denial, 'service', courtesy, honour, and courage. Its weakness is, of course, that it began as an artificial courtly game, a way of enjoying love for its own sake without reference to (and indeed contrary to) matrimony. Its centre was not God, but imaginary Deities, Love and the Lady. It still tends to make the Lady a kind of guiding star or divinity – of the old-fashioned 'his divinity' = the woman he loves – the object or reason of noble conduct. This is, of course, false and at best make-believe. The woman is another fallen human-being with a soul in peril. But combined and harmonized with religion (as long ago it was, producing much of that beautiful devotion to Our Lady that has been God's way of refining so much our gross manly natures and emotions, and also of warming and colouring our hard, bitter, religion) it can be very noble. Then it produces what I suppose is still felt, among those who retain even vestigiary Christianity, to be the highest ideal of love between man and woman. Yet I still think it has dangers. It is not wholly true, and it is not perfectly 'theocentric'. It takes, or at any rate has in the past taken, the young man's eye off women as they are, as companions in shipwreck not guiding stars. (One result is for observation of the actual to make the young man turn cynical.) To forget their desires, needs and temptations. It inculcates exaggerated notions of 'true love', as a fire from without, a permanent exaltation, unrelated to age, childbearing, and plain life, and unrelated to will and purpose. (One result of that is to make young folk look for a 'love' that will keep them always nice and warm in a cold world, without any effort of theirs; and the incurably romantic go on looking even in the squalor of the divorce courts).

Women really have not much part in all this, though they may use the language of romantic love, since it is so entwined in all our idioms. The sexual impulse makes women (naturally when unspoiled more unselfish) very sympathetic and understanding, or specially desirous of being so (or seeming so), and very ready to enter into all the interests, as far as they can, from ties to religion, of the young man they are attracted to. No intent necessarily to deceive: sheer instinct: the servient, helpmeet instinct, generously warmed by desire and young blood. Under this impulse they can in fact often achieve very remarkable insight and understanding, even of things otherwise outside their natural range: for it is their gift to be receptive, stimulated, fertilized (in many other matters than the physical) by the male. Every teacher knows that. How quickly an intelligent woman can be taught, grasp his ideas, see his point – and how (with rare exceptions) they can go no further, when they leave his hand, or when they cease to take a personal interest in him. But this is their natural avenue to love. Before the young woman knows where she is (and while the romantic young man, when he exists, is still sighing) she may actually 'fall in love'. Which for her, an unspoiled natural young woman, means that she wants to become the mother of the young man's children, even if that desire is by no means clear to her or explicit. And then things are going to happen: and they may be very painful and harmful, if things go wrong. Particularly if the young man only wanted a temporary guiding star and divinity (until he hitches his waggon to a brighter one), and was merely enjoying the flattery of sympathy nicely seasoned with a titillation of sex – all quite innocent, of course, and worlds away from 'seduction'.

You may meet in life (as in literature) women who are flighty, or even plain wanton — I don't refer to mere flirtatiousness, the sparring practice for the real combat, but to women who are too silly to take even love seriously, or are actually so depraved as to enjoy 'conquests', or even enjoy the giving of pain – but these are abnormalities, even though false teaching, bad upbringing, and corrupt fashions may encourage them. Much though modern conditions have changed feminine circumstances, and the detail of what is considered propriety, they have not changed natural instinct. A man has a life-work, a career, (and male friends), all of which could (and do where he has any guts) survive the shipwreck of 'love'. A young woman, even one 'economically independent', as they say now (it usually really means economic subservience to male commercial employers instead of to a father or a family), begins to think of the 'bottom drawer' and dream of a home, almost at once. If she really falls in love, the shipwreck may really end on the rocks. Anyway women are in general much less romantic and more practical. Don't be misled by the fact that they are more 'sentimental' in words – freer with 'darling', and all that. They do not want a guiding star. They may idealize a plain young man into a hero; but they don't really need any such glamour either to fall in love or to remain in it. If they have any delusion it is that they can 'reform' men. They will take a rotter open-eyed, and even when the delusion of reforming him fails, go on loving him. They are, of course, much more realistic about the sexual relation. Unless perverted by bad contemporary fashions they do not as a rule talk 'bawdy'; not because they are purer than men (they are not) but because they don't find it funny. I have known those who pretended to, but it is a pretence. It may be intriguing, interesting, absorbing (even a great deal too absorbing) to them: but it is just plumb natural, a serious, obvious interest; where is the joke?

They have, of course, still to be more careful in sexual relations, for all the contraceptives. Mistakes are damaging physically and socially (and matrimonially). But they are instinctively, when uncorrupt, monogamous. Men are not. .... No good pretending. Men just ain't, not by their animal nature. Monogamy (although it has long been fundamental to our inherited ideas) is for us men a piece of 'revealed' ethic, according to faith and not to the flesh. Each of us could healthily beget, in our 30 odd years of full manhood, a few hundred children, and enjoy the process. Brigham Young (I believe) was a healthy and happy man. It is a fallen world, and there is no consonance between our bodies, minds, and souls.

However, the essence of a fallen world is that the best cannot be attained by free enjoyment, or by what is called 'self-realization' (usually a nice name for self-indulgence, wholly inimical to the realization of other selves); but by denial, by suffering. Faithfulness in Christian marriage entails that: great mortification. For a Christian man there is no escape. Marriage may help to sanctify & direct to its proper object his sexual desires; its grace may help him in the struggle; but the struggle remains. It will not satisfy him – as hunger may be kept off by regular meals. It will offer as many difficulties to the purity proper to that state, as it provides easements. No man, however truly he loved his betrothed and bride as a young man, has lived faithful to her as a wife in mind and body without deliberate conscious exercise of the will, without self-denial. Too few are told that — even those brought up 'in the Church'. Those outside seem seldom to have heard it. When the glamour wears off, or merely works a bit thin, they think they have made a mistake, and that the real soulmate is still to find. The real soul-mate too often proves to be the next sexually attractive person that comes along. Someone whom they might indeed very profitably have married, if only —. Hence divorce, to provide the 'if only'. And of course they are as a rule quite right: they did make a mistake. Only a very wise man at the end of his life could make a sound judgement concerning whom, amongst the total possible chances, he ought most profitably to have married! Nearly all marriages, even happy ones, are mistakes: in the sense that almost certainly (in a more perfect world, or even with a little more care in this very imperfect one) both partners might have found more suitable mates. But the 'real soul-mate' is the one you are actually married to. You really do very little choosing: life and circumstance do most of it (though if there is a God these must be His instruments, or His appearances). It is notorious that in fact happy marriages are more common where the 'choosing' by the young persons is even more limited, by parental or family authority, as long as there is a social ethic of plain unromantic responsibility and conjugal fidelity. But even in countries where the romantic tradition has so far affected social arrangements as to make people believe that the choosing of a mate is solely the concern of the young, only the rarest good fortune brings together the man and woman who are really as it were 'destined' for one another, and capable of a very great and splendid love. The idea still dazzles us, catches us by the throat: poems and stories in multitudes have been written on the theme, more, probably, than the total of such loves in real life (yet the greatest of these tales do not tell of the happy marriage of such great lovers, but of their tragic separation; as if even in this sphere the truly great and splendid in this fallen world is more nearly achieved by 'failure' and suffering). In such great inevitable love, often love at first sight, we catch a vision, I suppose, of marriage as it should have been in an unfallen world. In this fallen world we have as our only guides, prudence, wisdom (rare in youth, too late in age), a clean, heart, and fidelity of will.....

My own history is so exceptional, so wrong and imprudent in nearly every point that it makes it difficult to counsel prudence. Yet hard cases make bad law; and exceptional cases are not always good guides for others.

[...]

Out of the darkness of my life, so much frustrated, I put before you the one great thing to love
on earth: the Blessed Sacrament. .... There you will find romance, glory, honour, fidelity, and the
true way of all your loves upon earth, and more than that: Death: by the divine paradox, that which
ends life, and demands the surrender of all, and yet by the taste (or foretaste) of which alone can
what you seek in your earthly relationships (love, faithfulness, joy) be maintained, or take on that
complexion of reality, of eternal endurance, which every man's heart desires.

Source: Letter #43, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, From a letter to Michael Tolkien 6-8 March 1941
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:7
Now, keeping in mind what we said above in regard to the passage from Isaiah about the bill of divorce, we will say that the mother of the people separated herself from Christ, her husband, without having received the bill of divorce.Afterward, however, when an unseemly thing was found in her, she did not find favor in his sight, and the bill of divorce was written out for her. When the new covenant called those of the Gentiles to the house of him who had cast away his former wife, it virtually gave the bill of divorce to her who formerly separated from her husband—the law and the Word. Therefore, he also having separated from her, married, so to speak, another, having given into the hands of the former wife the bill of divorce. So they can no longer do what was ordered to them under the law because of the certificate of divorce. And a sign that she has received the bill of divorce is that Jerusalem was destroyed along with what they called the sanctuary of the things in it which were believed to be holy, the altar of burnt offerings and all the rites contained in it. And a further sign of the bill of divorce is this, that they cannot keep their feasts, even though the letter of the law specifically commanded them [to be celebrated] in the place that the Lord God appointed for keeping feasts. At present the whole synagogue cannot stone those who have committed such and such sins; and thousands of other instructions are proof of the certificate of divorce. Add to this the fact that “there is no longer any prophet” and that they say, “We do not see any signs.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 14.19
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:7
But if you put forward Moses, I tell you of Moses' Lord, and together with this, I rely upon the time also. For God at the beginning made them male and female; and this law is older (though it seem to have been now introduced by me), and with much earnestness established. For not merely did He bring the woman to the man, but also commanded to leave father and mother. And neither did He make it a law for him merely to come to the woman, but also to cleave to her, by the form of the language intimating that they might not be severed. And not even with this was He satisfied, but sought also for another greater union, for the two, He says, shall be one flesh.

Then after He had recited the ancient law, which was brought in both by deeds and by words, and shown it to be worthy of respect because of the giver, with authority after that He Himself too interprets and gives the law, saying, So that they are no more two, but one flesh. Like then as to sever flesh is a horrible thing, so also to divorce a wife is unlawful. And He stayed not at this, but brought in God also by saying, What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder, showing that the act was both against nature, and against law; against nature, because one flesh is dissevered; against law, because that when God has joined and commanded it not to be divided, you conspire to do this.

What then ought they to have done after this? Ought they not to have held their peace, and to have commended the saying? Ought they not to have marvelled at His wisdom? Ought they not to have stood amazed at His accordance with the Father? But none of these things do they, but as though they were contending for the law, they say, How then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? And yet they ought not now to have brought this forward, but rather He to them; but nevertheless He does not take advantage of them, nor does He say to them, I am not now bound by this, but He solves this too.

And indeed if He had been an alien from the old covenant, He would not have striven for Moses, neither would He have argued positively from the things done once for all at the beginning; He would not have studied to show that His own precepts agreed with those of old.

And indeed Moses had given many other commandments besides, both those about meats, and those about the Sabbath; wherefore then do they nowhere bring him forward, as here? From a wish to enlist the multitude of the husbands against him. For this was considered a thing indifferent with the Jews, and all used to do so much as this. Accordingly it was for this reason that when so many things had been said on the mount, they remembered this commandment only now.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:7
They ought not to have brought this up to him but rather he to them. Nevertheless he does not take advantage of them, nor does he say, “I am not now bound by this,” but he explained this, too. In fact, if he had been alien from the old law, he would not have argued on Moses’ side, nor would he have argued from the original events in the beginning; nor would he have striven to show that his views agreed with the old ones. In fact, Moses gave many other commandments, about foods to eat, about the sabbath. Why do they not challenge Jesus with Moses anywhere else, as they do here? The motive of his detractors was that they wanted the crowd of husbands to be stirred up against him. For divorce was viewed as a matter of considerable indifference among the Jews. Yet when so many things had been said on the mount, they remembered this commandment only now.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 62.2
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:7
(Verse 7) They said to him, 'So why did Moses command us to give a bill of divorce and dismiss?' They open the trap they had prepared. And certainly the Lord had not given his own opinion, but had remembered the old history and commandments of God.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 1963] CS Lewis on Matthew 19:7-9
Christianity teaches that marriage is for life. There is, of course, a difference here between different Churches: some do not admit divorce at all; some allow it reluctantly in very special cases. It is a great pity that Christians should disagree about such a question; but for an ordinary layman the thing to notice is that the Churches all agree with one another about marriage a great deal more than any of them agrees with the outside world. I mean, they all regard divorce as something like cutting up a living body, as a kind of surgical operation. Some of them think the operation so violent that it cannot be done at all; others admit it as a desparate remedy in extreme cases. They are all agreed that it is more like having both you legs cut off than it is like dissolving a business partnership or even deserting a regiment. What they all disagree with is the modern view that it is a simple readjustment of partners, to be made whenever people feel they are no longer in love with one another, or when either of them falls in love with someone else.

Source: Mere Christianity, Chapter 6 - Christian Marriage
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:8
There, while prohibiting divorce, He has given us a solution of this special question respecting it: "Moses," says He, "because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to give a bill of divorcement; but from the beginning it was not so" -for this reason, indeed, because He who had "made them male and female" had likewise said, "They twain shall become one flesh; what therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Source: Against Marcion Book IV
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:8
So true, moreover, is it that divorce "was not from the beginning," that among the Romans it is not till after the six hundredth year from the building of the city that this kind of "hard-heartedness" is set down as having been committed.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:8
Nevertheless, unspeakable wisdom makes a defense even for these things, and says, Moses for the hardness of your hearts thus made the law. And not even him does He suffer to remain under accusation, forasmuch as He had Himself given him the law; but delivers him from the charge, and turns the whole upon their head, as everywhere He does.

For again when they were blaming His disciples for plucking the ears of grain, He shows themselves to be guilty; and when they were laying a transgression to their charge as to their not washing their hands, He shows themselves to be the transgressors, and touching the Sabbath also: both everywhere, and here in like manner.

Then because the saying was hard to bear, and brought on them much blame, He quickly directs back His discourse to that ancient law, saying as He had said before also, But in the beginning it was not so, that is, God by His acts at the beginning ordained the contrary. For in order that they may not say, Whence is it manifest, that for our hardness Moses said this? hereby again He stops their mouths. For if this were the primary law, and for our good, that other would not have been given at the beginning; God in creating would not have so created, He would not have said such things.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:8
Nevertheless, with unspeakable wisdom he makes a defense even for these things, saying that “Moses for the hardness of your hearts” had thus made that law. And he does not let Moses remain accused, since it was he himself who had given Moses the law, but he frees him from blame and turns the whole matter onto their heads, as he does everywhere. Just as when they accused the disciples while they were gleaning grain, he showed the accusers themselves to be at fault. When they charged them with eating with unwashed hands, Jesus proved that they themselves were the transgressors; and the same happened over the sabbath. So it happened here too.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 62.2
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:8
(Verse 8.) He said to them: because Moses allowed you to divorce your wives due to the hardness of your hearts, but it was not like that from the beginning. This is what he meant: Can God be opposed to himself, so that he would command one thing before and then nullify his own command with a new one? It should not be understood this way. Rather, Moses, seeing that because of the desire for second wives, who were either richer, younger, or more beautiful, the first wives were being killed or leading a bad life, preferred to tolerate discord rather than continue with hatred and murders (Deut. XXIV). At the same time, consider that God did not allow it because of the hardness of your hearts, but Moses did, so that, according to the Apostle's counsel (1 Corinthians 7), it may be a human choice, not a commandment from God.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:9
But, however, since Patience takes the lead in every species of salutary discipline, what wonder that she likewise ministers to Repentance, (accustomed as Repentance is to come to the rescue of such as have fallen, ) when, on a disjunction of wedlock (for that cause, I mean, which makes it lawful, whether for husband or wife, to persist in the perpetual observance of widowhood), she waits for, she yearns for, she persuades by her entreaties, repentance in all who are one day to enter salvation? How great a blessing she confers on each!The one she prevents from becoming an adulterer; the other she amends.

Source: Of Patience
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:9
Perhaps some one will say, that Jesus in thus speaking, suffered wives to be put away for the same cause that Moses suffered them, which He says was for the hardness of the hearts of the Jews. But to this it is to be answered, that if by the Law an adulteress is stoned, that sin is not to be understood as the shameful thing for which Moses suffers a writing of divorcement; (Deut. 24:1.) for in a cause of adultery it was not lawful to give a writing of divorcement. But Moses perhaps calls every sin in a woman a shameful thing, which if it be found in her, a bill of divorcement is written against her. But we should enquire, If it is lawful to put away a wife for the cause of fornication only, what is it if a woman be not an adulteress, but have done any other heinous crime; have been found a poisoner, or to have murdered her children? The Lord has explained this matter in another place, saying, Whoso putteth her away, except for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery, (Mat. 5:32.) giving her an opportunity of a second marriage.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 382] Apollinaris of Laodicea on Matthew 19:9
To commit adultery is to have relations with a woman who is not one’s proper spouse. A man commits adultery if he brings another woman in, instead of the one to whom he was lawfully bound. The law forbade obvious adultery, which is when another man seduces the woman in the house. But the Savior includes also that adultery that has not become known to everyone or that has not been proven as having occurred physically, because it is still adultery. Moreover, Christ agrees that the unfaithful wife has rebelled because she herself has destroyed the natural yoking and is no longer treated as a wife by her husband.

Source: FRAGMENT 94
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:9
Having stopped their mouths, He now set forth the Law with authority, saying, But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and marrieth another, committeth adultery.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:9
But I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife except it be for fornication, and marry another, commits adultery. For since he had stopped their mouths, He then gives the law with His own authority, like as touching the meats, like as touching the Sabbath.

For with regard to the meats likewise, when He had overcome them, then, and not till then, He declared unto the multitude, that, Not that which goes in defiles the man; Matthew 15:11 and with regard to the Sabbath, when He had stopped their mouths, He says, Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath day; Matthew 12:12 and here this self-same thing.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:9
It is fornication alone which destroys the relationship of the wife; for when she has divided one flesh into two, and has separated herself by fornication from her husband, she is not to be retained, lest she should bring her husband also under the curse, which Scripture has spoken, He that keepeth an adulteress is a fool and wicked. (Prov. 18:23.)

For it might be that a man might falsely charge an innocent wife, and for the sake of another woman might fasten an accusation upon her. Therefore it is commanded so to put away the first, that a second be not married while the first is yet alive. Also because it might happen that by the same law a wife would divorce her husband, it is also provided that she take not another husband; and because one who had become an adulteress would have no further fear of disgrace, it is commanded that she many not another husband. But if she do marry another, she is in the guilt of adultery; wherefore it follows, And whoso marrieth her that is put away, committeth adultery.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:9
(Verse 9.) But I say to you, that whoever divorces his wife, except for fornication, and marries another, commits adultery. And he who marries a divorced woman, commits adultery. Only fornication is what overcomes a wife's affection: indeed, when she divides one flesh into another, and separates herself from her husband through fornication, she should not be held: lest she also make her husband subject to a curse, as Scripture says: Whoever holds onto an adulteress, is foolish and wicked. Therefore, whenever there is fornication, or even suspicion of fornication, the wife is freely dismissed. And because it could happen that someone falsely accuses the innocent person and implicates them in an old crime due to a second marriage, the husband is commanded to divorce the first wife so that he does not have a second wife while the first one is still alive. For what he says is as follows: If you divorce your wife not for lust but for injury, why do you expose yourself to the danger of unhappy previous marriages by entering into new ones? Moreover, because it could happen that, according to the same law, a wife could also give a divorce to her husband, the same caution is prescribed so that she does not marry a second man. And because a prostitute, and one who has once been an adulteress, does not fear disgrace, the same caution is prescribed for the husband, that if he marries such a woman, he is subject to the crime of adultery.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Matthew 19:9
(De Conjug. Adult. ii. 9.) For a reunion of the wedlock, even after actual commission of adultery, is neither shameful nor difficult, where there is an undoubted remission of sin through the keys of the kingdom of heaven; not that after being divorced from her husband an adulteress should be called back again, but that after her union with Christ she should no longer be called an adulteress.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Matthew 19:9
There is then but one carnal cause why a wife should be put away, that is, fornication, and but one spiritual, that is, the fear of God. But there is no cause why while she who has been put away is alive, another should be married.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:9
. When the Pharisees saw that the Lord had confuted them, they were compelled to bring forward Moses as a lawgiver who contradicted Christ, and they asked, "Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?" Then the Lord, turning every accusation upon their own head, defends Moses by saying, "Moses did not set this law in contradiction to God, but rather he addressed this law to your depravity, so that when you in your licentiousness desired to come together with other women, you would not put to death your first wife." For the Israelites, being cruel, would have murdered their wives if they were constrained to keep them. So Moses provided in the law for a writ of divorce to be given to those wives who were hated by their husbands. But I say to you, Christ says, that it is good to divorce as an adulteress a wife who has committed fornication, but if one divorces a wife who has not committed fornication, he becomes in part the cause of adultery for her if she should marry again. Understand this also, that "he that is joined unto the Lord is of one spirit with Him" (I Cor. 6:17) and a union takes place between the believer and Christ. For we have all become one body with Him and we are, each one of us, members of Christ. So indeed no one can separate such a union, as Paul said, Who can separate us from the love of Christ? For what God has joined together, nothing can separate, as Paul says, neither man nor any other created thing, not angels, principalities, or powers (See Rom. 8:38-39).
[AD 1274] Pseudo-Chrysostom on Matthew 19:9
Therefore said He well, Moses suffered, not commanded. For what we command, that we ever wish; but when we suffer, we yield against our will, because we have not the power to put full restraint upon the evil wills of men. He therefore suffered you to do evil that you might not do worse; thus in suffering this he was not enforcing the righteousness of God, but taking away its sinfulness from a sin; that while you did it according to His law, your sin should not appear sin.

For as he is cruel and unjust that puts away a chaste wife, so is he a fool and unjust that retains an unchaste; for in that he hides the guilt of his wife, he is an encourager of foulness.

For every thing by whatsoever causes it is created, by the same is it destroyed. It is not matrimony but the will that makes the union; and therefore it is not a separation of bodies but a separation of wills that dissolves it. He then who puts away his wife and does not take another is still her husband; for though their bodies be not united, their wills are united. But when he takes another, then he manifestly puts his wife away; wherefore the Lord says not, Whoso putteth away his wife, but, Whoso marrieth another, committeth adultery.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1274] Glossa Ordinaria on Matthew 19:9
(ord.) He says this to the terror of him that would take her to wife, for the adulteress would have no fear of disgrace.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:10-12
The cause in one item he assigns nature; in the next violence, and in the last his own choice, in him, namely, that determined to be so from hope of the kingdom of heaven.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:10-12
For it is a lighter thing to contend with himself, and his own lust, than with an evil woman.

Then to show that this is possible, He says, For there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men; as much as to say, Consider, had you been so made of others, you would have lost the pleasure without gaining the reward.

When he says, Who have made themselves eunuchs, He does not mean cutting off of members, but a putting away of evil thoughts. For he that cuts off a limb is under a curse, for such an one undertakes the deeds of murderers, and opens a door to Manicheans who depreciate the creature, and cut off the same members as do the Gentiles. For to cut off members is of the temptation of dæmons. But by the means of which we have spoken desire is not diminished but made more urgent; for it has its source elsewhere, and chiefly in a weak purpose and an unguarded heart, For if the heart be well governed, there is no danger from the natural motions; nor does the amputation of a member bring such peacefulness and immunity from temptation as does a bridle upon the thoughts.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:10
What then was Christ saying? He did not say, “Yes, marriage would be easier; that is what you must do.” He did not want the disciples to consider this as a commandment. So he added, “Not all receive this word but only those to whom it is given.” He raises up the matter of marriage and shows that it is important, both drawing them toward chastity and encouraging them. The Gospel of Matthew, Homily
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:10
But what took place there, this happened here also. For as there, when the Jews had been put to silence the disciples were troubled, and came unto Him with Peter and said, Declare unto us this parable; Matthew 15:15 even so now also they were troubled and said, If the case of the man be so, it is good not to marry.

For now they understood the saying more than before. Therefore then indeed they held their peace, but now when there has been gainsaying, and answering, and question, and learning by reply, and the law appeared more clear, they ask Him. And openly to contradict they do not dare, but they bring forward what seemed to be a grievous and galling result of it, saying, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. For indeed it seemed to be a very hard thing to have a wife full of every bad quality, and to endure a wild beast perpetually shut up with one in the house. And that you may learn that this greatly troubled them, Mark said, Mark 10:10 to show it, that they spoke to Him privately.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:10-12
A wife is a grievous burden, if it is not permitted to put her away except for the cause of fornication. For what if she be a drunkard, an evil temper, or of evil habits, is she to be kept? The Apostles, perceiving this burden someness, express what they feel; His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

But let none think, that wherein He adds, save they to whom it is given, that either fate or fortune is implied, as though they were virgins only whom chance has led to such a fortune. For that is given to those who have sought it of God, who have longed for it, who have striven that they might obtain it.

He speaks of three kinds of eunuchs, of whom two are carnal, and one spiritual. One, those who are so born of their mother's womb; another, those whom enemies or courtly luxury has made so; a third, those who have made themselves so for the kingdom of heaven, and who might have been men, but become eunuchs for Christ. To them the reward is promised, for to the others whose continence was involuntary, nothing is due.

(cf. Orig. in loc.) Or we may say otherwise. The eunuchs from their mothers' wombs are they whose nature is colder, and not prone to lust. And they that are made so of men are they whom physicians made so, or they whom worship of idols has made effeminate, or who from the influence of heretical teaching pretend to chastity, that they may thereupon claim truth for their tenets. But none of them obtain the kingdom of heaven, save he only who has become a eunuch for Christ's sake. Whence it follows, He that is able to receive it, let him receive it; let each calculate his own strength, whether he is able to fulfil the rules of virginity and abstinence. For in itself continence is sweet and alluring, but each man must consider his strength, that he only that is able may receive it. This is the voice of the Lord exhorting and encouraging on His soldiers to the reward of chastity, that he who can fight might fight and conquer and triumph.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:10
(Verse 10.) His disciples said to him: If such is the case between a man and his wife, it is not expedient to marry. The burden of wives is heavy, for apart from the cause of fornication, they cannot be divorced. For what if she is drunken, if she is angry, if she is of bad morals, if she is lascivious, if she is gluttonous, if she is wandering, if she is quarrelsome, if she is abusive? She must be endured. For when we were free, we willingly subjected ourselves to servitude. Therefore, seeing the heavy burden of wives, the apostles express their thoughts and say, if it is so, it is not expedient for a man to marry.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:10
The disciples are troubled and say, "If they are joined together so that they are one and remain inseparable their whole life, so that even if the wife should be a schemer, or worse, he dare not divorce her, it is not expedient to marry. For it would be easier not to marry, and to war and struggle against physical desires, than to endure a wicked woman." "The case of the man with his wife" means the unbreakable union. But some interpret it this way: if the case of man be so, that is, if the man who unlawfully divorces his wife draws such a charge, or blame and accusation, against himself, it is not expedient to marry.
[AD 1274] Pseudo-Chrysostom on Matthew 19:10-12
And the Lord said not, It is good, but rather assented that it is not good. However, He considered the weakness of the flesh; But he said unto them, All cannot receive this saying; that is, All are not able to do this.

But all cannot obtain it, because all do not desire to obtain it. The prize is before them; he who desires the honour will not consider the toil. None would ever vanquish, if all shunned the struggle. Because then some have fallen from their purpose of continence, we ought not therefore to faint from that virtue; for they that fall in the battle do not slay the rest. That He says therefore, Save they to whom it is given, shows that unless we receive the aid of grace, we have not strength. But this aid of grace is not denied to such as seek it, for the Lord says above, Ask, and ye shall receive.

For as the deed without the will does not constitute a sin; so a righteous act is not in the deed unless the will go with it. That therefore is honourable continence, not which mutilation of body of necessity enforces, but which the will of holy purpose embraces.

For they are born such, just as others are born having six or four fingers. For if God according as He formed our bodies in the beginning, had continued the same order unchangeably, the working of God would have been brought into oblivion among men. The order of nature is therefore changed at times from its nature, that God the framer of nature may be had in remembrance.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1274] Glossa Ordinaria on Matthew 19:10-12
(ord.) He says this to the terror of him that would take her to wife, for the adulteress would have no fear of disgrace.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:11
But what is, If such be the case of a man with his wife? That is, if to this end he is joined with her, that they should be one, or, on the other hand, if the man shall get to himself blame for these things, and always transgresses by putting away, it were easier to fight against natural desire and against one's self, than against a wicked woman.

What then says Christ? He said not, yea, it is easier, and so do, lest they should suppose that the thing is a law; but He subjoined, Not all men receive it, but they to whom it is given, Matthew 19:11 raising the thing, and showing that it is great, and in this way drawing them on, and urging them.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:11
(Verse 11.) He said to them: Not everyone can understand this word, but only those to whom it is given. No one should think that under this word, either fate or fortune is introduced: these are the virgins to whom it has been given by God, or whom certain circumstances have brought to this, but it has been given to those who have asked, who have desired, who have worked to receive it. For everyone who asks will receive, and the one who seeks will find, and to the one who knocks, it will be opened (Matthew 7:8 and Luke 11:10).

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:11
Since the disciples had said that it would be better not to enter into marriage, the Lord says that virginity is a great thing but not everyone can achieve it, but only those with whom God acts in synergy. "They to whom it is given" refers to those with whom God acts in synergy. It is given to those who ask. For He says, "Ask, and it shall be given you. For everyone that asketh receiveth" (Lk. 11:9).
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
Thus in the Revelation of John it is said: "These are they which have not defiled their clothes with women," -indicating, of course, virgins, and such as have become "eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake." Therefore they shall be "clothed in white raiment," that is, in the bright beauty of the unwedded flesh.

Source: On the Resurrection of the Flesh
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
Further, if we set down in order the higher and happier grades of bodily patience, (we find that)it is she who is entrusted by holiness with the care of continence of the flesh: she keeps the widow, and sets on the virgin the seal and raises the self-made eunuch to the realms of heaven. That which springs from a virtue of the mind is perfected in the flesh; and, finally, by the patience of the flesh, does battle under persecution.

Source: Of Patience
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
If, then he shows plainly that even wives themselves are so to be had as if they be not had, on account of the straits of the times, what would be his sentiments about these vain appliances of theirs? Why, are there not many, withal, who so do, and seal themselves up to eunuchhood for the sake of the kingdom of God, spontaneously relinquishing a pleasure so honourable, and (as we know) permitted? Are there not some who prohibit to themselves (the use of) the very "creature of God," abstaining from wine and animal food, the enjoyments of which border upon no peril or solicitude; but they sacrifice to God the humility of their soul even in the chastened use of food? Sufficiently, therefore, have you, too, used your riches and your delicacies; sufficiently have you cut down the fruits of your dowries, before (receiving) the knowledge of saving disciplines.

Source: On the Apparel of Women Book II
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
How many are there who from the moment of their baptism set the seal (of virginity) upon their flesh? How many, again, who by equal mutual consent cancel the debt of matrimony-voluntary eunuchs for the sake of their desire! after the celestial kingdom! But if, while the marriage-tie is still intact, abstinence is endured, how much more when it has been undone! For I believe it to be harder for what is intact to be quite forsaken, than for what has been lost not to be yearned after.

Source: To His Wife Book I
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
This (even) broader assertion we make: that even if the Paraclete had in this our day definitely prescribed a virginity or continence total and absolute, so as not to permit the heat of the flesh to foam itself down even in single marriage, even thus He would seem to be introducing nothing of "novelty; "seeing that the Lord Himself opens "the kingdoms of the heavens" to "eunuchs," as being Himself, withal, a virgin; to whom looking, the apostle also-himself too for this reason abstinent-gives the preference to continence.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
But (now), when the "extremity of the times" has cancelled (the command) "Grow and multiply," since the apostles (another command), "It remaineth, that both they who have wives so be as if they have not," because "the time is compressed; and "the sour grape" chewed by "the fathers" has ceased "to set the sons' teeth on edge," for, "each one shall die in his own sin; "and "eunuchs" not only have lost ignominy, but have even deserved grace, being invited into "the kingdoms of the heavens: " the law of succeeding to the wife of a brother being buried, its contrary has obtained-that of not succeeding to the wife of a brother.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
is it that He Himself withal should set upon His own official chair men who were mindful rather to enjoin-(but) not likewise to practise-sanctity of the flesh, which (sanctity) He had in all ways recommended to their teaching and practising?-first by His own example, then by all other arguments; while He tells (them) that "the kingdom of heavens" is "children's; " while He associates with these (children) others who, after marriage, remained (or became)virgins; " while He calls (them) to (copy) the simplicity of the dove, a bird not merely innocuous, but modest too, and whereof one male knows one female; while He denies the Samaritan woman's (partner to be) a husband, that He may show that manifold husbandry is adultery; while, in the revelation of His own glory, He prefers, from among so many saints and prophets, to have with him Moses and Elias -the one a monogamist, the other a voluntary celibate (for Elias was nothing else than John, who came "in the power and spirit of Elias" ); while that "man gluttonous and toping," the "frequenter of luncheons and suppers, in the company of publicans and sinners," sups once for all at a single marriage, though, of course, many were marrying (around Him); for He willed to attend (marriages) only so often as (He willed) them to be.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
How long shall we allege "the flesh," because the Lord said, "the flesh is weak? " But He has withal premised that "the Spirit is prompt," in order that the Spirit may vanquish the flesh-that the weak may yield to the stronger. For again He says, "Let him who is able to receive, receive (it); " that is, let him who is not able go his way.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:12
These things, my brother, seem to you perhaps harsh and not to be endured; but recall that God has said, "He who receives it, let him receive it," that is, let him who does not receive it go his way.

Source: On Flight in Persecution
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:12
But see herein a contradiction. For He indeed says this is a great thing; but they, that it is easier. For it was meet that both these things should be done, and that it should be at once acknowledged a great thing by Him, that it might render them more forward, and by the things said by themselves it should be shown to be easier, that on this ground too they might the rather choose virginity and continence. For since to speak of virginity seemed to be grievous, by the constraint of this law He drove them to this desire. Then to show the possibility of it, He says, There are some eunuchs, who were so born from their mother's womb, there are some eunuchs which were made eunuchs of men, and there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of Heaven's sake, Matthew 19:12 by these words secretly leading them to choose the thing, and establishing the possibility of this virtue, and all but saying, Consider if you were in such case by nature, or had endured this selfsame thing at the hands of those who inflict such wanton injuries, what would you have done, being deprived indeed of the enjoyment, yet not having a reward? Thank God therefore now, for that with rewards and crowns you undergo this, which those men endure without crowns; or rather not even this, but what is much lighter, being supported both by hope, and by the consciousness of the good work, and not having the desire so raging like waves within you.

For the excision of a member is not able to quell such waves, and to make a calm, like the curb of reason; or rather, reason only can do this.

For this intent therefore He brought in those others, even that He might encourage these, since if this was not what He was establishing, what means His saying concerning the other eunuchs? But when He says, that they made themselves eunuchs, He means not the excision of the members, far from it, but the putting away of wicked thoughts. Since the man who has mutilated himself, in fact, is subject even to a curse, as Paul says, I would they were even cut off which trouble you. And very reasonably. For such a one is venturing on the deeds of murderers, and giving occasion to them that slander God's creation, and opens the mouths of the Manichæans, and is guilty of the same unlawful acts as they that mutilate themselves among the Greeks. For to cut off our members has been from the beginning a work of demoniacal agency, and satanic device, that they may bring up a bad report upon the work of God, that they may mar this living creature, that imputing all not to the choice, but to the nature of our members, the more part of them may sin in security, as being irresponsible; and doubly harm this living creature, both by mutilating the members, and by impeding the forwardness of the free choice in behalf of good deeds.

These are the ordinances of the devil, bringing in, besides the things which we have mentioned, another wicked doctrine also, and making way beforehand for the arguments concerning destiny and necessity even from hence, and everywhere marring the freedom given to us of God, and persuading us that evil deeds are of nature, and hence secretly implanting many other wicked doctrines, although not openly. For such are the devil's poisons.

Therefore I beseech you to flee from such lawlessness. For together with the things I have mentioned, neither does the force of lust become milder hereby, but even more fierce. For from another origin has the seed that is in us its sources, and from another cause do its waves swell. And some say from the brain, some from the loins, this violent impulse has its birth; but I should say from nothing else than from an ungoverned will and a neglected mind: if this be temperate, there is no evil result from the motions of nature.

Having spoken then of the eunuchs that are eunuchs for nought and fruitlessly, unless with the mind they too practise temperance, and of those that are virgins for Heaven's sake, He proceeds again to say, He that is able to receive it, let him receive it, at once making them more earnest by showing that the good work is exceeding in greatness, and not suffering the thing to be shut up in the compulsion of a law, because of His unspeakable gentleness. And this He said, when He showed it to be most possible, in order that the emulation of the free choice might be greater.

And if it is of free choice, one may say, how does He say, at the beginning, All men do not receive it, but they to whom it is given? That you might learn that the conflict is great, not that you should suspect any compulsory allotments. For it is given to those, even to the willing.

But He spoke thus to show that much influence from above is needed by him who enters these lists, whereof He that is willing shall surely partake. For it is customary for Him to use this form of speech when the good work done is great, as when He says, To you it is given to know the mysteries.

And that this is true, is manifest even from the present instance. For if it be of the gift from above only, and they that live as virgins contribute nothing themselves, for nought did He promise them the kingdom of Heaven, and distinguish them from the other eunuchs.

But mark thou, I pray, how from some men's wicked doings, other men gain. I mean, that the Jews went away having learned nothing, for neither did they ask with the intent of learning, but the disciples gained even from hence.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:12
There are three kinds of eunuchs, two carnal and the third spiritual. One group are those who are born this way. Another are those who are made into eunuchs by captivity or for pleasuring older women. The third are those who “have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven” and who become eunuchs for Christ though they could be whole men. The last group are promised the reward. The other two, for whom chastity is not a matter of willing but necessity, are due nothing at all. We can put it another way. There are eunuchs from birth who are of a rather frigid nature and not inclined to lust. There are others who are made eunuchs by men, those who are made so by philosophers, others who are made weak toward sex from their worship of idols, and still others who by heretical persuasion feign chastity so as to falsely claim the truth of religion. None of the above is receptive to the kingdom of heaven. Only the person who for Christ seeks chastity wholeheartedly and cuts off sexual impurity altogether [is the genuine eunuch]. So he adds, “He who is able to receive this, let him receive it,” so that each of us should look to his own strength as to whether he can carry out the commands of virginity and chastity. Chastity in itself is agreeable and alluring; but one must look to one’s strength so that “he who is able to receive this may receive it.” It is as if the Lord with his words were urging on his soldiers to the reward of chastity with these words: He who is able to receive this let him receive it; he who is able to fight, let him fight and conquer.

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.19.12
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:12
(Verse 12.) For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it. There are three types of eunuchs: those who are eunuchs from birth, those who are made eunuchs by men, and those who make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Some are born eunuchs, others are made eunuchs by men, and others choose to be eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. And those who can accept it should accept it. A reward is promised to these people, but to the previous ones, for whom the necessity of chastity is not voluntary, nothing is owed at all. We can say differently. There are eunuchs who are born from their mother's womb, who are of a colder nature and do not desire lust. And there are others who are made by humans: whom either philosophers make, or they are softened into women because of the worship of idols: or they pretend chastity due to heretical persuasion, in order to lie about the truth of religion. But none of them will inherit the kingdom of heaven unless he has castrated himself for the sake of Christ. Therefore, it is concluded: He who is able to receive this, let him receive it; so that each person may consider his own abilities, whether he can fulfill the commands of virginity and chastity. For chastity is enticing in itself, attracting anyone to itself. But one's abilities must be considered, so that he who is able to receive it, may receive it. It is like the voice of the Lord urging and inciting his soldiers to the reward of chastity. Let whoever is able to understand, understand; let whoever is able to fight, fight, overcome and triumph.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:12
There are few, He says, who can achieve this virginity. For there are some who are eunuchs from their mother’s womb, that is, by their physical temperament are never aroused towards sexual intercourse, so they are chaste without thereby deriving any profit. And there are those who have been made eunuchs by men. Those who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake are not those who have castrated themselves (for that is an accursed deed), but those who exercise self-control. You may also understand it this way. He is a eunuch by nature who, on account of his physical temperament, is not easily aroused to carnal pleasures. He who is made a eunuch by men is he who is guided by human teaching to cut off the burning of carnal desires. He who makes himself a eunuch is he who is instructed by no one else but by himself, and who, self-taught, inclines towards chastity. So this one is best who is guided not by another but by himself to the kingdom of heaven. Christ wants us of our own free will to practice virtue, saying, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." For Christ neither demands virginity, nor dissolves marriage, but He puts virginity first.
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:13
But further, if Christ reproves the scribes and Pharisees, sitting in the official chair of Moses, but not doing what they taught,68 what kind of (supposition). is it that He Himself withal should set upon His own official chair men who were mindful rather to enjoin-(but) not likewise to practise-sanctity of the flesh, which (sanctity) He had in all ways recommended to their teaching and practising?-first by His own example, then by all other arguments; while He tells (them) that "the kingdom of heavens" is "children's; " while He associates with these (children) others who, after marriage, remained (or became)virgins; " while He calls (them) to (copy) the simplicity of the dove, a bird not merely innocuous, but modest too, and whereof one male knows one female; while He denies the Samaritan woman's (partner to be) a husband, that He may show that manifold husbandry is adultery; while, in the revelation of His own glory, He prefers, from among so many saints and prophets, to have with him Moses and Elias -the one a monogamist, the other a voluntary celibate (for Elias was nothing else than John, who came "in the power and spirit of Elias" ); while that "man gluttonous and toping," the "frequenter of luncheons and suppers, in the company of publicans and sinners," sups once for all at a single marriage, though, of course, many were marrying (around Him); for He willed to attend (marriages) only so often as (He willed) them to be.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:13-15
For they now understood from His previous mighty works, that by laying on of His hands and by prayer evils were obviated. They bring therefore children to Him, judging that it were impossible that after the Lord had by His touch conveyed divine virtue into them, harm or any demon should come nigh them.

Mystically; We call them children who are yet carnal in Christ, having need of milk. They who bring the babes to the Saviour, are they who profess to have knowledge of the word, but are still simple, and have for their food children's lessons, being yet novices. They who seem more perfect, and are therefore the disciples of Jesus, before they have learnt the way of righteousness which is for children, rebuke those who by simple doctrine bring to Christ children and babes, that is, such as are less learned. But the Lord exhorting His disciples now become men to condescend to the needs of babes, to be babes to babes, that they may gain babes, says, For of such is the kingdom of heaven. For He Himself also, when He was in the form of God, was made a babe. These things we should attend to, lest in esteeming that more excellent wisdom, and spiritual advancement, as though we were become great we should despise the little ones of the Church, forbidding children to be brought to Jesus. But since children cannot follow all things that are commanded them, Jesus laid His hands upon them, and leaving virtue in them by His touch, went away from them, seeing they were not able to follow Him, like the other more perfect disciples.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:13-15
The infants are a type of the Gentiles, to whom salvation is rendered by faith and hearing. But the disciples, in their first zeal for the salvation of Israel, forbid them to approach, but the Lord declares that they are not to be forbidden. For the gift of the Holy Ghost was to be conferred upon the Gentiles by laying on of hands, as soon as the Law had ceased.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:13
The children prefigure the Gentiles, to whom salvation is given through faith and the simple word. But since the goal was first to save Israel, they were at first prevented by the disciples from approaching. The action of the apostles is not about their personal desires but rather their serving as a type or prefiguring of the future proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles. The Lord says that the children should not be prevented because “theirs is the kingdom of heaven”; for the grace and gift of the Holy Spirit was going to be bestowed on the Gentiles by the laying on of hands, when the work of the law ceased.

Source: Commentary on Matthew 19.3
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:13-15
When he says, Who have made themselves eunuchs, He does not mean cutting off of members, but a putting away of evil thoughts. For he that cuts off a limb is under a curse, for such an one undertakes the deeds of murderers, and opens a door to Manicheans who depreciate the creature, and cut off the same members as do the Gentiles. For to cut off members is of the temptation of dæmons. But by the means of which we have spoken desire is not diminished but made more urgent; for it has its source elsewhere, and chiefly in a weak purpose and an unguarded heart, For if the heart be well governed, there is no danger from the natural motions; nor does the amputation of a member bring such peacefulness and immunity from temptation as does a bridle upon the thoughts.

Or the disciples would have thrust them away, from respect to Christ's dignity1. But the Lord teaching them holy thoughts, and to subdue the pride of this world, took the children into His arms, and promised to such the kingdom of heaven; But Jesus saith unto them, Suffer little children and forbid them not to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:13
And wherefore did the disciples repel the little children? For dignity. What then does He? Teaching them to be lowly, and to trample under foot worldly pride, He does receive them, and takes them in His arms, and to such as them promises the kingdom; which kind of thing He said before also. Matthew 18:3-4

Let us also then, if we would be inheritors of the Heavens, possess ourselves of this virtue with much diligence. For this is the limit of true wisdom; to be simple with understanding; this is angelic life; yes, for the soul of a little child is pure from all the passions. Towards them who have vexed him he bears no resentment, but goes to them as to friends, as if nothing had been done; and how much soever he be beaten by his mother; after her he seeks, and her does he prefer to all. Though thou show him the queen with a diadem, he prefers her not to his mother clad in rags, but would choose rather to see her in these, than the queen in splendor. For he uses to distinguish what pertains to him and what is strange to him, not by its poverty and wealth, but by friendship. And nothing more than necessary things does he seek, but just to be satisfied from the breast, and then he leaves sucking. The young child is not grieved at what we are grieved, as at loss of money and such things as that, and he does not rejoice again at what we rejoice, namely, at these temporal things, he is not eager about the beauty of persons.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:13-15
Not because they liked not that they should have benediction of the Saviour's hand and mouth; but forasmuch as their faith was not yet perfect, they thought that He like other men would be wearied by the applications of those that brought them.

And He said distinctly, Of such is the kingdom of heaven, not Of these, to show that it was not years, but disposition that determined His judgment, and that the reward was promised to such as had like innocence and simplicity.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:13-14
(Verses 13, 14.) Then little children were brought to him, so that he could lay his hands on them and pray. But the disciples rebuked them. Jesus said to them, 'Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.'

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 533] Remigius of Rheims on Matthew 19:13-15
For it was a custom among the ancients that little children should be brought to aged persons, to receive benediction by their hand or tongue, and according to this custom little children are now brought to the Lord.

Also laying His hands upon them, He blessed them, to signify that the lowly in spirit are worthy His grace and blessing.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1274] Pseudo-Chrysostom on Matthew 19:13-15
The Lord had been holding discourse of chastity; and some of His hearers now brought unto Him infants, who in respect of chastity are the purest; for they supposed that it was the pure in body only whom He had approved; and this is that which is said, Then were brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray.

The flesh as it delights not in good, if it hear any good readily forgets it; but the evil that it has it retains ever. But a little while before Christ took a little child and said, Except ye become as this child, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven, (Matt. 18:3.) yet His disciples, presently forgetting this innocence of children, now forbid children, as unworthy to come to Christ.

For who were worthy to come to Christ, if simple infancy were thrust away? Therefore he said, Forbid them not. For if they shall turn out saints, why hinder ye the sons from coming to their Father? And if sinners, why do ye pronounce a sentence of condemnation, before you see any fault in them?

The present passage instructs all parents to bring their children to the priests, for it is not the priest who lays his hands on them, but Christ, in whose name hands are laid. For if he that offers his food in prayer to God eats it sanctified, for it is sanctified by the word of God, and by prayer, as the Apostle speaks, how much rather ought children to be offered to God, and sanctified? (1 Tim. 4:5.) And this is the reason of blessing of food, Because the whole world lieth in wickedness; (1 John 5:19.) so that all things that have body, which are a great part of the world, lie in wickedness. Consequently infants when born, are as respects their flesh lying in wickedness.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1274] Glossa Ordinaria on Matthew 19:13-15
(non occ.) He laid His hands upon them while men held them, to signify that the grace of His aid was necessary.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:14
For why is it necessary-if (baptism itself) is not so necessary -that the sponsors likewise should be thrust into danger? Who both themselves, by reason of mortality, may fail to fulfil their promises, and may be disappointed by the development of an evil disposition, in those for whom they stood? The Lord does indeed say, "Forbid them not to come unto me." Let them "come," then, while they are growing up; let them "come" while they are learning, while they are learning whither to come; let them become Christians when they have become able to know Christ.

Source: On Baptism
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:14
Therefore He said, of such is the kingdom of Heaven, that by choice we should practise these things, which young children have by nature. For since the Pharisees from nothing else so much as out of craft and pride did what they did, therefore on every hand He charges the disciples to be single hearted, both darkly hinting at those men, and instructing these. For nothing so much lifts up unto haughtiness, as power and precedence. Forasmuch then as the disciples were to enjoy great honors throughout the whole world, He preoccupies their mind, not suffering them to feel anything after the manner of men, neither to demand honors from the multitude, nor to have men clear the way before them.

For though these seem to be little things, yet are they a cause of great evils. The Pharisees at least being thus trained were carried on into the very summit of evil, seeking after the salutations, the first seats, the middle places, for from these they were cast upon the shoal of their mad desire of glory, then from thence upon impiety. So therefore those men went away having drawn upon themselves a curse by their tempting, but the little children a blessing, as being freed from all these.

Let us then also be like the little children, and in malice be we babes. 1 Corinthians 14:20 For it cannot be, it cannot be for one otherwise to see Heaven, but the crafty and wicked must needs surely be cast into hell.

And before hell too, we shall here suffer the utmost ills. For if you be evil, it is said, thou alone shall endure the evil; but if good, it is for yourself and for your neighbor. Mark, at any rate, how this took place in the former instances also. For neither was anything more wicked than Saul, nor more simple and single-hearted than David. Which therefore was the stronger? Did not David get him twice into his hands, and having the power to slay him, forebore? Had he not him shut up as in a net and prison, and spared him? And this when both others were urging him, and when he himself was able to accuse him of countless charges; but nevertheless he suffered him to go away safe. And yet the other was pursuing him with all his army, but he was, with a few desperate fugitives, wandering and changing from place to place; nevertheless the fugitive had the advantage of the king, forasmuch as the one came to the conflict with simplicity, the other with wickedness.

For what could be more wicked than that man, who when he was leading his armies, and bringing all his wars to a successful issue, and undergoing the labors of the victory and the trophies, but bringing the crowns to him, assayed to slay him?

6. Such is the nature of envy, it is ever plotting against its own honors, and wasting him that has it, and encompassing him with countless calamities. And that miserable man, for instance, until David departed, burst not forth into that piteous cry, bewail ing himself and saying, I am sore distressed, and the Philistines make war against me, and the Lord is departed from me. 1 Samuel 28:15 Until he was separated from David, he fell not in war, but was both in safety and in glory; for indeed unto the king passed the glory of the captain. For neither was the man disposed to usurpation, nor did he assay to depose the other from his throne, but for him did he achieve all things, and was earnestly attached to him, and this is evident even from what followed afterwards. For when indeed he was set under him, any one of them who do not search carefully might perhaps suppose these things to be by the usual custom of a subject; but after he had withdrawn himself out of Saul's kingdom, what then was there to restrain him, and to him even to slay? Had not the other been evil towards him once, twice, and often? Was it not after having received benefits from him? Was it not having nothing whereof to accuse him? Was not Saul's kingdom and safety danger and insecurity to himself? Must he not needs wander and be a fugitive, and be in trembling for fear of the utmost ills, while the other is alive, and reigning? Nevertheless none of these things constrained him to stain his sword with blood, but when he saw him asleep, and bound, and alone, and in the midst of his own men, and had touched his head, and when there were many rousing him to it, and saying the opportunity thus favorable was a judgment of God, he at once rebuked those who were urging him on, and refrained from the murder, and sent him away both safe and well; and as though he had been rather a body guard of his, and a shield-bearer, not an enemy, so did he chide the host for their treachery towards the king. 1 Samuel 26:16

What could be equal to this soul? What to that mildness? For this it is possible to see even by the things that have been mentioned but much more by what are done now. For when we have considered our vileness, then we shall know more perfectly the virtue of those saints. Wherefore I entreat you to hasten towards the emulation of them.

For indeed if you love glory, and for this cause art plotting against your neighbor, then shall you enjoy it more largely, when having spurned it, you will abstain from the plotting. For like as to become rich is contrary to covetousness, so is the loving of glory to the obtaining of glory. And if you be minded, let us inquire into each. For since we have no fear of hell, nor much regard for the kingdom, come and even from the things present let us lead you on.

For who are they that are ridiculous? Tell me. Is it not they that are doing anything for the sake of glory from the multitude? And who are the objects of praise? Is it not they who spurn the praise of the multitude? Therefore if the love of vainglory be matter of reproach, and it cannot be concealed that the vainglorious man loves it, he will assuredly be an object of reproach, and the love of glory has become to him a cause of dishonor. And not in this respect only does he disgrace himself, but also in that he is compelled to do many things shameful, and teeming with the utmost disgrace. And like as with respect to their gains men are wont to suffer harm more than anything from the disease of covetousness (they become at least the subjects of many tricks, and of small gains make great losses, wherefore this saying has prevailed even to be a proverb); and as to the voluptuous man likewise, his passion becomes a hindrance to the enjoyment of his pleasure. These at least that are exceedingly given up thereto, and are the slaves of women these above all do women carry about as servants, and will never vouchsafe to treat them as men, buffeting, spurning them, leading, and taking them about everywhere, and giving themselves airs, and in everything merely giving them orders.

Even so also than him that is arrogant and mad about glory, and accounts himself to be high, nothing is more base and dishonored. For the race of man is fond of contention, and against nothing else does it set itself so much, as against a boaster, and a contemptuous man, and a slave of glory.

And he himself too, in order to maintain the fashion of his pride, exhibits the conduct of a slave to the common sort, flattering, courting them, serving a servitude more grievous than that of one bought for money.

Knowing then all these things, let us lay down these passions, that we may not both pay a penalty here, and there be punished without end. Let us become lovers of virtue. For so both before reaching the kingdom we shall reap the greatest benefits here, and when we are departed there we shall partake of the eternal blessings; unto which God grant we may all attain by the grace and love towards man of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and might world without end. Amen.
[AD 510] Epiphanius Scholasticus on Matthew 19:14
Why did the disciples keep the children back? Not because of the children’s wickedness but because it was not the right time. They did not want the Lord to be tired by the great crowd. To them he said, “Let the children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.” For children are ignorant of wickedness. They do not know how to return evil for evil or how to do someone an injury. They do not know how to be lustful or to fornicate or to rob. What they hear, they believe. They love their parents with complete affection. Therefore, beloved, the Lord instructs us that what they are by the gift of nature, we should become by the fear of God, a holy way of life and love of the heavenly kingdom; for unless we are alien to all sin just like children, we cannot come to the Savior.

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 25
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:14
. Mothers were bringing their children to be blessed by the touch of His hands. But they were crowding in towards Him in an unruly manner, which is why the disciples forbade them. The disciples also thought that bringing children to Him diminished His dignity as Teacher and Master. Christ therefore shows that He especially accepts the guilelessness of a little child, saying, "Let the little children come unto Me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven." He does not say, "of these," but "of such," that is, the kingdom of heaven belongs to those who have simplicity, guilelessness and innocence. And if one is teaching and some draw near asking childish questions, let the teacher accept them and not forbid them.
[AD 382] Apollinaris of Laodicea on Matthew 19:15
Only the wickedness and corruption of the creature stands in the way of our approaching the Creator. Lack of wisdom should not prevent it. He seeks completeness, and your approach is welcome to him for this completeness. Therefore the words “For to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” are accurate. He did not say “of these” but “to such,” since lack of wisdom is a property of children. For the same reason the apostle said, “Do not be children in your thinking; be babes in evil.” And Mark also examines the cause, speaking and interpreting as follows: “To such belongs the kingdom of heaven” and “Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” Luke also said the same as Matthew above: “Whoever humbles himself like this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” For those qualities which the child has by nature, God wishes us to have by choice: simplicity, forgetfulness of wrongs done to us, love of our parents, even if struck by them. He laid his hands on the children because the laying on of hands signifies the arming of God’s power.

Source: FRAGMENT 96
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:15
(Verse 15.) Allow the children, and do not prohibit them from coming to me: for such is the kingdom of heaven. And when he had laid his hands on them, he departed from there. He specifically said 'such', not 'these', to show that it is not age that reigns but character; and that those who have similar innocence and simplicity will be rewarded. The apostle also agrees with this sentiment: Brothers, do not be children in your thinking, but be infants in evil, and mature in your thinking (1 Corinthians 14:20).

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:16
That rich man did go his way who had not "received" the precept of dividing his substance to the needy, and was abandoned by the Lord to his own opinion. Nor will "harshness" be on this account imputed to Christ, the Found of the vicious action of each individual free-will.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:16-22
Christ also answers thus, because of that He said, What good thing shall I do? For when we depart from evil and do good, that which we do is called good by comparison with what other men do. But when compared with absolute good, in the sense in which it is here said, There is one good, our good is not good. But some one may say, that because the Lord knew that the purpose of him who thus asked Him was not even to do such good as man can do, that therefore He said, Why askest thou me concerning good? as much as to say, Why do you ask me concerning good, seeing you are not prepared to do what is good. But after this He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Where note, that He speaks to him as yet standing without life; for that man is in one sense without life, who is without Him who said, I am the life. Otherwise, every man upon earth may be, not in life itself, but only in its shadow, while he is clad in a body of death. But any man shall enter into life, if he keep himself from dead works, and seek living works. But there are dead words and living words, also dead thoughts and living thoughts, and therefore He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Or perhaps these precepts are enough to introduce one, if I may say so, to the entrance of life; but neither these, nor any like them, are enough to conduct one to the more inward parts of life. But whoso transgresses one of these commandments, shall not even come to the entrance in unto life.

If every commandment is fulfilled in this one word, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, and if he is perfect who has fulfilled every command, how is it that the Lord said to the young man, If thou wilt be perfect, when he had declared, All these have I kept from my youth up. Perhaps that he says, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, was not said by the Lord, but added by some one, for neither Mark nor Luke have given it in this place. Or otherwise; It is written in the Gospela according to the Hebrews, that, when the Lord said, Go, and sell all that thou hast, the rich man began to scratch his head, being displeased with the saying. Then the Lord said unto him, How sayest thou, I have kept the Law, and the Prophets, since it is written in the Law, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself? For how many of thy brethren sons of Abraham, clothed in filth, perish for hunger? Thy house is full of many good things, and nothing goes thereout to them. The Lord then, desiring to convict this rich man, says to him, If thou will be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor; for so it will be seen if thou dost indeed love thy neighbour as thyself. But if he is perfect who has all the virtues, how does he become perfect who sells all that he has and gives to the poor? For suppose one to have done this, will he thereby become forthwith free from anger, desire, having every virtue, and abandoning all vice? Perhaps wisdom may suggest, that he that has given his goods to the poor, is aided by their prayers, receiving of their spiritual abundance to his want, and is made in this way perfect, though he may have some human passions. Or thus; He that thus exchanged his riches for poverty, in order that he might become perfect, shall have assistance to become wise in Christ, just, chaste also, and devoid of all passion; but not so as that in the moment when he gave up all his goods, he should forthwith become perfect; but only that from that day forward the contemplation of God will begin to bring him to all virtues. Or again, it will pass into a moral exposition, and say, that the possessions of a man are the acts of his mind. Christ then bids a man to sell all his evil possessions, and as it were to give them over to the virtues which should work the same, which were poor in all that is good. For as the peace of the Apostles returns to them again, (Mat. 10:13.) unless there be a son of peace, so all sins return upon their actors, when one will no longer indulge his evil propensities; and thus there can be no doubt that he will straightway become perfect who in this sense sells all his possessions. It is manifest that he that does these things, has treasure in heaven, and is himself become of heaven; and he will have in heaven treasure of God's glory, and riches in all God's wisdom. Such an one will be able to follow Christ, for he has no evil possession to draw him off from so following

But historically, the young man is to be praised for that he did not kill, did not commit adultery; but is to be blamed for that he sorrowed at Christ's words calling him to perfection. He was young indeed in soul, and therefore leaving Christ, he went his way.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:16-22
The infants are a type of the Gentiles, to whom salvation is rendered by faith and hearing. But the disciples, in their first zeal for the salvation of Israel, forbid them to approach, but the Lord declares that they are not to be forbidden. For the gift of the Holy Ghost was to be conferred upon the Gentiles by laying on of hands, as soon as the Law had ceased.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:16
And, behold, one came and said to him, “Good Master, what deed must I do to inherit eternal life?” Some criticize this young man as dissembling and wicked, approaching Jesus to put him to the test. I would not hesitate to say that he is avaricious and greedy since Christ also showed him up as such. Yet I would by no means call him a dissembler, because it is not safe to venture on things uncertain and especially in a case of blame. Such is also true because Mark has taken away the suspicion of dissembling. For Mark says, “A man ran up and kneeling before him asked him” and “Jesus looking upon him loved him.” The tyranny of money is a powerful thing, as is clear here. Though we are practiced in the other virtues, avarice brings the others to ruin. The Gospel of Matthew, Homily
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:16
Some indeed accuse this young man, as one dissembling and ill-minded, and coming with a temptation to Jesus, but I, though I would not say he was not fond of money, and under subjection to his wealth, since Christ in fact convicted him of being such a character, yet a dissembler I would by no means call him, both because it is not safe to venture on things uncertain, and especially in blame, and because Mark has taken away this suspicion; for he says, that having come running unto Him, and kneeling to Him, he besought Him, and that Jesus beheld him, and loved him. Mark 10:17-21

But great is the tyranny of wealth, and it is manifest hence; I mean, that though we be virtuous as to the rest, this ruins all besides. With reason has Paul also affirmed it to be the root of all evils in general. For the love of money is the root of all evils, he says.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:16-22
(Hom. lxiii.) But I for my part, though I deny not that he was a lover of money, because Christ convicts him as such, cannot consider him to have been a hypocrite, because it is unsafe to decide in uncertain cases, and especially in making charges against any. Moreover Mark removes all suspicion of this kind, for he says that he came to Him, and knelt before Him; (Mark 10:17.) and that Jesus when He looked on him, loved him. And if he had come to tempt Him, the Evangelist would have signified as much, as he has done in other places. Or if he had said nothing thereof, Christ would not have suffered him to be hid, but would either have convicted him openly, or have covertly suggested it. But He does not this; for it follows, He saith unto him, Why askest thou me concerning good?

Wherein then was the profit that He answered thus? He leads him by degrees, and teaches him to lay aside false flattery, and rising above the things which are upon earth to cleave to God, to seek things to come, and to know Him that is truly good, the root and source of every good.

This he said not to tempt Him, but because he supposed that they were other than the commandments of the Law, which should be the means of life to him.

But because all the commandments that the Lord had recounted were contained in the Law, The young man saith unto him. All these have I kept from my youth up. And did not even rest there, but asked further, What lack I yet? which alone is a mark of his intense desire.

And because He spake of riches warning us to strip ourselves of them, He promises to repay things greater, by how much heaven is greater than earth, and therefore He says, And thou shalt have treasure in heaven. By the word treasure He denotes the abundance and endurance of the reward.

For they that have little, and they that abound, are not in like measure encumbered. For the acquisition of riches raises a greater flame, and desire is more violently kindled.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:16
(V. 16.) And behold, one approached him and said to him: Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said to him: This one who asks how to obtain eternal life is both young and wealthy, and proud; and according to another evangelist, he asks not out of a desire to learn, but to test (Mark X).

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:16-22
He that asks this question is both young, rich, and proud, and he asks not as one that desires to learn, but as tempting Him. This we can prove by this, that when the Lord had said unto him, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments, he further insidiously asks, which are the commandments? as if he could not read them for himself, or as if the Lord could command any thing contrary to them.

But because he had styled Him Good Master, and had not confessed Him as God, or as the Son of God, He tells him, that in comparison of God there is no saint to be called good, of whom it is said, Confess unto the Lord, for he is good; (Ps. 118:1.) and therefore He says, There is one good, that is, God. But that none should suppose that by this the Son of God is excluded from being good, we read in another place, The good Shepherd layeth down his life for his sheep. (John 10:11.)

For Our Saviour does not reject this witness to His goodness, but corrected the error of calling Him Good Master apart from God.

(cont. Vigilant. 15.) That Vigilantius asserts that they who retain the use of their property, and from time to time divide their incomes among the poor, do better than they who sell their possessions and lavish them in one act of charity, to him, not I, but God shall make answer, If thou wilt be perfect, Go and sell. That which you so extol, is but the second or third grade; which we indeed admit, only remembering that what is first is to be set before what is third or second.

For many who leave their riches do not therefore follow the Lord; and it is not sufficient for perfection that they despise money, unless they also follow the Saviour, that unless having forsaken evil, they also do what is good. For it is easier to contemn the hoard than quit the propensityb; therefore it follows, And come and follow me; for he follows the Lord who is his imitator, and who walks in his steps. It follows, And when the young man had heard these words, he went away sorrowful. This is the sorrow that leads to death. And the cause of his sorrow is added, for he had great possessions, thorns, that is, and briars, which choked the holy leaven.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Matthew 19:16-22
(de Cons. Ev. ii. 63.) This may seem a discrepancy, that Matthew here gives it, Why askest thou me concerning good? whereas Mark and Luke have, Why callest thou me good? For this, Why askest thou me concerning good? may seem rather to be referred to his question, What good thing shall I do? for in that he both mentioned good, and asked a question. But this, Good Master, is not yet a question. Either sentence may be understood thus very appropriately to the passage.

(de Trin. i. 13.) Or, because he sought eternal life, (and eternal life consists in such contemplation in which God is beheld not for punishment, but for everlasting joy,) and knew not with whom he spake, but thought Him only a Son of Man, therefore He says, Why askest thou me concerning good, calling me in respect of what you see in me, Good Master? This form of the Son of Man shall appear in the judgment, not to the righteous only, but to the wicked, and the very sight shall be to them an evil, and their punishment. But there is a sight of My form, in which I am equal to God. That one God therefore, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is alone good, because none see Him to mourning and sorrow, but only to salvation and true joy.

(Serm. 84, 1.) And He said not, If thou desirest life eternal; but, If thou wilt enter into life, calling that simply life, which shall be everlasting. Here we should consider how eternal life should be loved, when this miserable and finite life is so loved.

(de. Op. Monach. 25.) Nor need it be made a scruple in what monasteries, or to the indigent brethren of what place, any one gives those things that he has, for there is but one commonwealth of all Christians. Therefore wheresoever any Christian has laid out his goods, in all places alike he shall receive what is necessary for himself, shall receive it of that which is Christ's.

(cont. Faust. v. 9.) Nor are such only partakers in the kingdom of heaven, who, to the end they may be perfect, sell or part with all that they have; but in these Christian ranks are numbered by reason of a certain communication of their charity a multitude of hired troops; those to whom it shall be said in the end, I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; (Mat. 25:35.) whom be it far from us to consider excluded from life eternal, as they who obey not the commands of the Gospel.

(Ep. 31, 5.) I know not how, but in the love of worldly superfluities, it is what we have already got, rather than what we desire to get, that most strictly enthrals us. For whence went this young man away sorrowful, but that he had great possessions? It is one thing to lay aside thoughts of further acquisition, and another to strip ourselves of what we have already made our own; one is only rejecting what is not ours, the other is like parting with one of our own limbs.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 496] Gennadius of Massilia on Matthew 19:16-22
(Gennadius, de Eccles. Dogm. 36.) It is good to distribute with discrimination to the poor; it is better, with resolve of following the Lord, to strip one's self of all at once, and freed from anxiety to suffer want with Christ.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 533] Remigius of Rheims on Matthew 19:16-22
These words prove that the Law gave to such as kept it not only temporal promises, but also life eternal. And because the hearing these things made him thoughtful, He saith unto him, Which?

And Jesus, condescending as to a weak one, most graciously set out to him the precepts of the Law; Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder; and of all these precepts follows the exposition, And thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. For the Apostle says, Whoso loveth his neighbour has fulfilled the Law? (Prov. 13:10.) But it should be enquired, why the Lord has enumerated only the precepts of the Second Table? Perhaps because this young man was zealous in the love of God, or because love of our neighbour is the step by which we ascend to the love of God.

But to those who would be perfect in grace, He shows how they may come to perfection, Jesus saith unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go, and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor. Mark the words; He said not, Go, and consume all thou hast; but Go, and sell; and not some, as did Ananias and Sapphira, but All. And well He added, that thou hast, for what we have are our lawful possessions. Those therefore that he justly possessed were to be sold; what had been gained unjustly were to be restored to those from whom they had been taken. And He said not, Give to thy neighbours, nor to the rich, but to the poor.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Matthew 19:16-22
(e Bed. in Luc. Mat. 18:3.) This man had, it may be, heard of the Lord, that only they who were like to little children were worthy to enter into the heavenly kingdom; but desiring to know more certainly, he asks to have it declared to him not in parables, but expressly, by what merits he might attain eternal life. Therefore it is said And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?

See two kinds of life which we have heard set before men; the Active, to which pertains, Thou shalt not kill, and the rest of the Law; and the Contemplative, to which pertains this, If thou wilt be perfect. The active pertains to the Law, the contemplative to the Gospel; for as the Old Testament went before the New, so good action goes before contemplation.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:16
The man did not come testing Christ, but desiring to learn and thirsting for eternal life. He approached Christ as if Christ were a mere man. That is why the Lord says, Why callest thou Me good? There is none good but One, that is, God. This means, "If you call Me good thinking I am one of the teachers, you speak wrongly, for no man is essentially good; both because we are changeable and easily turned away from good, and because, by comparison with God’s goodness, human goodness is counted as wickedness."
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:17
"But," say they, "God is `good, 'and `most good, ' and `pitiful-hearted, 'and `a pitier, 'and `abundant in pitiful-heartedness, ' which He holds `dearer than all sacrifice, ' `not thinking the sinner's death of so much worth as his repentance', `a Saviour of all men, most of all of believers.

Source: On Modesty
[AD 382] Apollinaris of Laodicea on Matthew 19:17
The teaching of the law is good, and Christ does not criticize it, but he says, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments,” indicating the beginning of this route but not its completion. Through this he shows that the law is not alien to himself, but perfection comes from himself.

Source: FRAGMENT 97
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:17
Wherefore then does Christ thus reply to him, saying, There is none good? Because He came unto Him as a mere man, and one of the common sort, and a Jewish teacher; for this cause then as a man He discourses with him. And indeed in many instances He replies to the secret thoughts of them that come unto Him; as when He says, We worship we know what; John 4:22 and, If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. John 5:31 When therefore He says, There is none good; not as putting Himself out from being good does He say this, far from it; for he said not, Why do you call me good? I am not good; but, there is none good, that is, none among men.

And when He says this self-same thing, He says it not as depriving even men of goodness, but in contradistinction to the goodness of God. Wherefore also He added, But one, that is, God; and He said not, but my Father, that you might learn that He had not revealed Himself to the young man. So also further back He called men evil, saying, If you, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children. Matthew 7:11 For indeed there too He called them evil, not as condemning the whole race as evil (for by ye, He means not ye men), but comparing the goodness that is in men with the goodness of God, He thus named it; therefore also He added, How much more shall your Father give good things to them that ask Him? And what was there to urge Him, or what the profit that He should answer in this way? He leads him on little by little, and teaches him to be far from all flattery, drawing him off from the things upon each, and fastening him upon God, and persuading him to seek after the things to come, and to know that which is really good, and the root and fountain of all things, and to refer the honors to Him.

Since also when He says, Call no one master upon earth, it is in contradistinction to Himself He says this, and that they might learn what is the chief sovereignty over all things that are. For neither was it a small forwardness the young man had shown up to this time in having fallen into such a desire; and when of the rest some were tempting, some were coming to Him for the cure of diseases, either their own or others, he for eternal life was both coming to Him, and discoursing with Him. For fertile was the land and rich, but the multitude of the thorns choked the seed. Mark at any rate how he is prepared thus far for obedience to the commandments. For By doing what, he says, shall I inherit eternal life? So ready was he for the performance of the things that should be told him. But if he had come unto Him, tempting Him, the evangelist would have declared this also to us, as He does also with regard to the others, as in the case of the lawyer. And though himself had been silent, Christ could not have suffered him to lie concealed, but would have convicted him plainly, or at least would have intimated it, so that he should not seem to have deceived Him, and to be hidden, and thereby have suffered hurt.

If he had come unto Him tempting, he would not have departed sorrowing for what he heard. This was not at any rate ever the feeling of any of the Pharisees, but they grew fierce when their mouths were stopped. But not so this man; but he goes away cast down, which is no little sign that not with an evil will he had come unto Him, but with one too feeble, and that he did indeed desire life, but was held in subjection by another and most grievous feeling.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:17
Why therefore did Christ reply to him in these words: “No one is good”? Because he considered Jesus a mere man and one of the crowd, and a Jewish teacher. For this reason he spoke as a man to him. For often he answers the hidden thoughts of the questioner, as when he says, “We worship what we know” and “If I bear witness of myself, my testimony is not true.” Therefore when he says, “No one is good,” he does not say this to show that he is not good; far from it. For he does not say, “Why do you call me good? I am not good” but “No one is good,” that is, no human being. When he says this, he does not mean to exclude men from goodness but to make a comparison with the goodness of God. Therefore he adds, “Except God alone.”

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 63.1
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:17
(Verse 17) Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one good God. Because he had called a good teacher, and not God, or the Son of God, he learns that even a holy man is not good in comparison to God, of whom it is said: Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good (Psalm 117:1). But lest anyone think that the goodness of God excludes the Son of God, we read in another place: The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep (John 10). And in the Prophet, the good Spirit and the good earth. Therefore, the Savior did not reject the testimony of goodness. But the teacher eliminated error without God.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Matthew 19:17
The Lord said to a certain young man, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” He did not say “If you would have life” but “If you would enter life,” defining that life as eternal life. Let us first consider then the love of this life. For this life is loved, whatever its quality; and however troubled it is, however wretched, people are afraid to end it. Hence we should see, we should consider, how much eternal life is to be loved, when this miserable life that must at some time be ended is so loved. Consider, brothers, how much that life is to be loved when it is a life you never end. You love this life, where you work so much, run, are busy, pant. In this busy life the obligations can scarcely be counted: sowing, plowing, working new land, sailing, grinding, cooking, weaving. And after all this hard work your life comes to an end. Look at what you suffer in this wretched life that you so love. And do you think that you will always live and never die? Temples, rocks, marbles, all reinforced by iron and lead, still fall. And a person thinks that he will never die? Learn therefore, brothers, to seek eternal life, when you will not endure these things but will reign with God forever.

Source: SERMON 84.1
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:17
The Lord directs the enquirer to the commandments of the law, so that the Jews could not say that He despised the law. What happened then?
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:18
These commandments are sufficient for someone entering on the ground level of the path of eternal life. But they are not sufficient to lead one to the higher life, and certainly not to perfection. One who fails in just one of these commandments cannot even enter the beginnings of life. Anyone who wishes to enter the early stages of the path of life must be free from adultery and murder and any kind of theft. For just as the adulterer and murderer will not enter into life, so neither will the thief. Many of those who are said to believe in Christ are guilty of this sin. Just look at their daily business and the way money is entrusted to them and the crafts they practice.

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 15.13
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:18
This young man has grown impudent from studying the law. He is worried about his salvation. Jesus sends him back to the law so that he might understand that, in the very thing in which he takes pride, he has as yet done no righteous work. For the Lord answered him with the words of the law. But the young man, like the boastful and impudent people of whom he is a type, put his trust in the law, but he did not really comply with it at all. For they had been ordered not to kill, yet they had killed the prophets. They knew they were not to commit adultery, yet they had brought corruption on the faith and adultery on the law and had worshiped other gods. They knew not to steal, yet by stealth they had dissolved the commandments of the law, before Christ restored the freedom of believing in the faith. They knew not to bear false witness, yet they denied that Christ rose from the dead. They were ordered to honor father and mother, yet they had separated themselves from the family of God the Father and their mother the church. They were ordered to love their neighbor as themselves, yet they persecuted Christ, who had assumed the body of us all and had become neighbor to each one of us by the condition of the assumed body; they persecuted him to the punishment of the cross. So the young man was ordered to cast off and cut out all these vices and to return to the law.

Source: Commentary on Matthew 19.5
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:18
Note how prepared the young man is to obey the commandments. For he says, “What must I do to have eternal life?” He seems ready to do what he would be told. If his purpose had been to put Jesus to a test, the Evangelist would have given some indication of this as he does in other cases, for instance, in the case of the lawyer. If the young man had remained silent or been deceptive, Jesus would have easily exposed that and brought it into the open. If the young man had come to test him, he would not have retreated downcast at what he heard. This never happened to any of the Pharisees. When refuted they were all the more angry. This man was not angry. He went away in sorrow, which is no little signal that he did not come to him with evil intent. But he did come with too weak a will. Truly he did desire life but was held in the grip of a serious moral infirmity. When therefore Christ said, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments,” he said “Which?” not putting him to the test—far from it—but because he thought that there were some other ones beside those in the law which could bring him life. So he seems to be quite earnest. The Gospel of Matthew, Homily
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:18
Therefore when Christ said, If you will enter into life, keep the commandments, he says, Which? Not tempting, far from it, but supposing there were some others besides those of the law that should procure him life, which was like one who was very desirous.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:18-19
(Verse 18, 19.) But if you want to enter life, keep the commandments. He said to him, 'Which ones?' Jesus replied, 'You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not give false testimony. Honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.' This young man is tempting, and from this we can prove that when the Lord tells him, 'If you want to enter life, keep the commandments,' he deceitfully asks what those commandments are: as if he himself had not read them, or as if the Lord could command something contrary to God.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 444] Cyril of Alexandria on Matthew 19:18
When Christ says to him, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments,” the man expects him to add immediately, “my commandments.” “Which ones?” he asks. He was quite deceived in his expectation. For Christ did not answer him as he expected but simply pointed him to the law. This is not because the law is perfection, for “no one is justified by the law,” as it is written, but because the life lived according to law is a kind of introduction to the eternal life, briefly acquainting trainees to the things above. “For the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ.” The law is the starting point for social justice. Christ is the perfection. For the beginning of good is to act justly, he says. Just action then is shown by the law, but goodness is shown by Christ. The law taught us to repay those who wish to harm us, as in “eye for eye, tooth for tooth.” But Christ taught us to let go such balanced vengeance with a view to the greater good, teaching that “if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if anyone would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well.”

Source: FRAGMENT 218
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:19
Are we to paint ourselves out that our neighbours may perish? Where, then, is (the command), "Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself? " "Care not merely about your own (things), but (about your) neighbour's? " No enunciation of the Holy Spirit ought to be (confined) to the subject immediately in hand merely, and not applied and carried out with a view to every occasion to which its application is useful.

Source: On the Apparel of Women Book II
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Matthew 19:19-20
The rich young man claimed to have kept the commandments. Then he heard the greater commandment: “If you wish to be perfect, you still lack one thing: sell all that you have and give it to the poor”; you will not lose it, but “you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” What good does it do you if you follow the law and do not follow me? He went away sad and sorrowful, as you have heard, for he had great wealth.What he heard, we too have heard. The Word of Christ is the gospel. He sits in heaven, but he does not cease to speak on earth. Let us not be deaf, for he shouts. Let us not be dead, for he thunders. If you are not willing to do the greater commandments, do the lesser ones. If the burden of the greater is too much for you, take up the lesser. Why are you slow to do either? Why do you oppose both? The greater commandments are “Sell everything that you have and give to the poor and follow me.” The lesser are “You shall not commit murder; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not bear false witness; you shall not steal; honor your father and mother; love your neighbor as yourself.” So do these things. Why do I shout to you that you must sell your possessions when I cannot get you to admit that you should not take someone else’s? You have heard, “You shall not steal.” You rob. Before the eyes of so great a judge, I now hold you not a thief but a robber. Spare yourself; pity yourself. This life still gives you time. Don’t reject reproof. Yesterday you were a thief; do not also be one today. Perhaps you have also been one today? Do not be one tomorrow. Sometime end your sin and expect good reward. You want to have your goods, but you are unwilling to be good. Your life is contrary to your hopes. If it is a great good to have a good house, how great an evil is it to have an evil soul?

Source: SERMON 85.1
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:20
Then since Jesus mentioned those out of the law, he says, All these things have I kept from my youth up. And neither at this did he stop, but again asks, What lack I yet? which itself again was a sign of his very earnest desire.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:20
(Verse 20.) The young man said to Him: All these things I have kept from my youth, what do I still lack? Jesus said to him: The young man lies. For if he had fulfilled the commandments: You shall love your neighbor as yourself, how then, upon hearing: Go, sell what you have and give to the poor, did he go away sad, for he had many possessions?

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:20
Some accuse him of boasting and arrogance. For how could he have achieved love for neighbor if he were rich? For no one who loves his neighbor as himself is wealthier than his neighbor. Others understand it thus: suppose, he says, that I have kept all these things — what do I still lack?
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:21
"My work was my subsistence." Nay, but "all things are to be sold, and divided to the needy." "But provision must be made for children and posterity.

Source: On Idolatry
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:21
Someone might ask, If a perfect person is one who possesses all the virtues and no longer acts out of malice, how can the person who sells all his possessions and gives it to the poor then be perfect? For granted someone has done this, how will he go forth instantly without rage if he has previously been subject to rage? How will he instantly be immune to grief and rise above all the worries that can beset someone and cause him grief? How can he be free from all fear, whether of troubles or of death or those things which can upset the still imperfect soul? How will it be that anyone who sells his possessions and gives them to the poor will lack all desire?More wisely a believer would seem to meet the question by keeping to the literal meaning and not expounding it allegorically. You decide for yourself whether what is said is worthily said according to its context or not. Some will say that anyone who gives to the poor is helped by their prayers. He takes for his salvation the abundance of the spiritual goods of those who are poor in material possessions to meet his own lack, as the apostle suggests in the second letter to the Corinthians. Who else would have this happen to him and be so greatly helped? For God listens to the prayers of so many poor people who have been relieved. Among them perhaps are people like the apostles or at any rate a little inferior to them, poor in material effects but rich in spiritual gifts.

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 15.16-17.26
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:21
Do you see how many prizes, how many crowns, He appoints for this race? If he had been tempting, He would not have told him these things. But now He both says it, and in order to draw him on, He also shows him the reward to be great, and leaves it all to his own will, by all means throwing into the shade that which seemed to be grievous in His advice. Wherefore even before mentioning the conflicts and the toil, He shows him the prize, saying If you will be perfect, and then says, Sell that you have, and give to the poor, and straightway again the rewards, You shall have treasure in Heaven; and come, and follow me. For indeed to follow Him is a great recompense. And you shall have treasure in Heaven.

For since his discourse was of money, even of all did He advise him to strip himself, showing that he loses not what he has, but adds to his possessions, He gave him more than He required him to give up; and not only more, but also as much greater as Heaven is greater than earth, and yet more so.

But He called it a treasure, showing the plenteousness of the recompense, its permanency, its security, so far as it was possible by human similitudes to intimate it to the hearer. It is not then enough to despise wealth, but we must also maintain poor men, and above all things follow Christ; that is, do all the things that are ordered by Him, be ready for slaughter and daily death. For if any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. Matthew 16:24 So that to cast away one's money is a much less thing than this last commandment, to shed even one's very blood; yet not a little does our being freed from wealth contribute towards this.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:21
It is in our power whether we wish to be perfect. Yet whoever wishes to be perfect ought to sell what he has—and not sell them in part, as Ananias did and Sapphira, but to sell it all. When he has sold it to give it all to the poor, he has begun to prepare for himself a treasure in the kingdom of heaven. Nor is this sufficient for perfection unless after despising riches he follows the Savior, that is, abandons evil and does good. For more easily is a little purse despised than one’s will. Many abandon their wealth but do not follow the Savior. To follow the Savior is to be an imitator of him and walk in his steps. Anyone who says that he believes in Christ must himself also walk in the steps he walked in.

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.19.21
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:21
(Verse 21.) If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me. It is in our power to choose to be perfect. However, whoever wishes to be perfect must sell what they have: and not sell only a portion, as Ananias and Sapphira did (Act. V); but sell everything: and when they have sold, give everything to the poor, and thus prepare for themselves treasure in the kingdom of heaven. And this is not enough for perfection unless one follows the Savior after despising riches, that is, by leaving behind evils and doing good. For it is easier to despise a purse than pleasure. Many who leave behind riches do not follow the Lord. But he who is an imitator of the Lord follows him and walks in his footsteps. For whoever says that they believe in Christ should walk as he walked (1 John 2:6).

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:21
Everything, He says, which you say you have accomplished, you have done by fulfilling only the letter of the law, as do the Jews. But if thou wilt be perfect, that is, if you wish to be My disciple and a Christian, then go and sell all that you have, and give everything all at once, keeping nothing back with which to give alms continuously. He did not say, "give repeatedly to the poor," but give once and for all and be stripped of your wealth. Since there are some who give alms but lead a life full of every kind of filth, He adds, and come and follow Me, that is, possess every other virtue as well. The young man, however, was sorrowful, for though he desired eternal life and the soil of his heart was deep and fertile, the thorns of wealth were choking him. For it says, he had great possessions. He who has few possessions is not similarly restrained by them, for the bond of many possessions is more tyrannical. Because the Lord was conversing with a rich man, He said, "Do you love wealth? Know that you will have treasure in heaven."
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:22
But the young man, when he heard this, “went away sorrowful.” For he put great trust in wealth. And in him we observe the rational working out of a metaphor. This was a young man. He himself said that since his youth he had obeyed the commandments that are contained in the law. Yet an arrested adolescence remains within his youth, whatever age he may be.

Source: Commentary on Matthew 19.7
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:22
After this the evangelist, as it were to show that he has not felt anything it was unlikely he should feel, says, For he had great possessions. For they that have little are not equally held in subjection, as they that are overflowed with great affluence, for then the love of it becomes more tyrannical. Which thing I cease not always saying, that the increase of acquisitions kindles the flame more, and renders the getters poorer, inasmuch as it puts them in greater desire, and makes them have more feeling of their want.

See, for example, even here what strength did this passion exhibit. Him that had come to Him with joy and forwardness, when Christ commanded him to cast away his riches, it so overwhelmed and weighed down, as not to suffer him so much as to answer touching these things, but silenced and become dejected and sullen to go away.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:22
(Verse 22.) He went away sad, for he had many possessions. This is the sadness that leads to death. And the cause of the sadness is that he had many possessions, that is, thorns and thistles, which choked the Lord's seed.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Matthew 19:22
E Bed. in Luc., Matt 18:3: This man had, it may be, heard of the Lord that only they who were like to little children were worthy to enter into the heavenly kingdom; but desiring to know more certainly, he asks to have it declared to him not in parables, but expressly, by what merits he might attain eternallife.Therefore it is said; “And behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:23
What am I to fasten on as the cause of this madness, except the weakness of faith, ever prone, to the concupiscences of worldly joys?-which, indeed, is chiefly found among the wealthier; for the more any is rich, and inflated with the name of "matron," the more capacious house does she require for her burdens, as it were a field wherein ambition may run its course. To such the churches look paltry. A rich man is a difficult thing (to find) in the house of God; and if such an one is (found there), difficult (is it to find such) unmarried.

Source: To His Wife Book II
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:23-26
But historically, the young man is to be praised for that he did not kill, did not commit adultery; but is to be blamed for that he sorrowed at Christ's words calling him to perfection. He was young indeed in soul, and therefore leaving Christ, he went his way.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:23-24
The arrogant young man, when told to make good his failure to obey the law, is downcast and sad. To the people of which he is a prototype, the cross and Passion are a stumbling block. There is no salvation for this young man there. But he glories in the law, despises the Gentiles and refuses to cross into the freedom of the gospel; therefore it will be difficult for him to enter the kingdom of heaven. For few of them—and compared with the multitude of the Gentiles they are very rare—were those Jews who would believe. It was difficult for them to bend their will, long hardened under the law, to the gospel’s preaching of humility. But more easily will the camel pass through the eye of a needle. A camel cannot fit into the eye of a needle, nor can the bulk of the huge beast be received by the narrow mouth of the tiny hole. In the beginning of this book in discussing John’s clothing I pointed out that the camel signifies the Gentiles. For this beast obeys the word, is restrained by fear, is tolerant of fasting and kneels to take on its burden with a kind of ordered discipline. In this comparison the wildness of the Gentiles has been tamed by obedience to God’s commandments. These then enter the very narrow path of the heavenly kingdom, that is, the needle, which is the preaching of the gospel word. By it the wounds of the body are stitched together, the torn clothing is rewoven, and death itself is pricked. Therefore this is the route of this new preaching. Into it the weakness of the Gentiles will enter with less difficulty than the opulence of the rich man, that is, of the one taking pride in the law.

Source: Commentary on Matthew 19.10-11
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:23-26
To have riches is no sin; but moderation is to be observed in our havings. For how shall we communicate to the necessities of the saints, if we have not out of what we may communicate?

It is a dangerous toil to become rich; and guiltlessness occupied in increasing its wealth has taken upon itself a sore burden; the servant of God gains not the things of the world, clear of the sins of the world. Hence is the difficulty of entering the kingdom of heaven.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:23
What then says Christ? How hardly shall the rich enter into the kingdom of Heaven! blaming not riches but them that are held in subjection by them. But if the rich man hardly, much more the covetous man. For if not to give one's own be an hindrance to entering the kingdom, even to take of other men's goods, think how much fire it heaps up.

Why can it have been, however, that He said to His disciples, that hardly shall a rich man enter in, they being poor men, and having no possessions? Instructing them not to be ashamed of their poverty, and, as it were, excusing Himself to them for suffering them to have nothing.

But having said it was hard; as He proceeds, He shows that it is even impossible, and not merely impossible, but even in the highest degree impossible; and this He showed by the comparison concerning the camel and the needle.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:23-26
What He spoke was not condemning riches in themselves, but those who were enslaved by them; also encouraging His disciples that being poor they should not be ashamed by reason of their poverty.

Having said that it was hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven, He now proceeds to show that it is impossible, And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven, (Is. 60:6.)

The disciples though poor are troubled for the salvation of others, beginning even now to have the bowels of doctors.

This therefore He proceeds to show is the work of God, there needing much grace to guide a man in the midst of riches; But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. By the word beheld them, the Evangelist conveys that He soothed their troubled soul by His merciful eye.

And this is not said that you should sit supinely, and let alone what may seem impossibilities; but considering the greatness of righteousness, you should strive to enter in with entreaty to God.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:23
(Verse 23) But Jesus said to his disciples: Amen I say to you, that it is difficult for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. And how did Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, being rich, enter into the kingdom of heaven (Genesis 13 and 36), and in the Gospel Matthew and Zacchaeus, leaving their riches behind, are proclaimed by the testimony of the Lord? But it must be considered that at the time they entered, they ceased to be rich. Therefore, they will not enter as long as they are rich. And yet, because riches are difficult to despise, he did not say, 'It is impossible for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven,' but rather 'It is difficult.' Where difficulty is presented, not impossibility is claimed; but rarity is demonstrated.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:23-26
Because riches once gained are hard to be despised, He saith not it is impossible, but it is hard. Difficulty does not imply the impossibility, but points out the infrequency of the occurrence.

According to this, no rich man can be saved. But if we read Isaiah, how the camels of Midian and Ephah came to Jerusalem with gifts and presents, and they who once were crooked and bowed down by the weight of their sins, enter the gates of Jerusalem, we shall see how these camels, to which the rich are likened when they have laid aside the heavy load of sins, and the distortion of their whole bodies, may then enter by that narrow and strait way that leads to life.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Matthew 19:23-26
(Quæst. Ev. 1, 26.) Whereas the rich are few in comparison of the multitude of the poor, we must suppose that the disciples understood all who wish for riches, as included in the number of the rich.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 444] Cyril of Alexandria on Matthew 19:23
By “camel” here he means not the living thing, the beast of burden, but the thick rope to which sailors tie their anchors. He shows this comparison to be not entirely pointless (as a camel would be), but he makes it an exceedingly difficult matter; in fact, next to impossible.
[AD 533] Remigius of Rheims on Matthew 19:23-26
Whence in Mark the Lord expounding the meaning of this saying, speaks thus, It is hard for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of heaven (Mark 10:24.) They trust in riches, who build all their hopes on them.

This must not be so understood as though it were possible for God to cause that the rich, the covetous, the avaricious, and the proud should enter into the kingdom of heaven; but to cause him to be converted, and so enter.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 604] Gregory the Dialogist on Matthew 19:23-26
(Mor. xxxv. 16.) Or, by the rich man He intends any one who is proud, by the camel he denotes the right humility. The camel passed through the needle's eye, when our Redeemer through the narrow way of suffering entered in to the taking upon Him death; for that passion was as a needle which pricked the body with pain. But the camel enters the needle's eye easier than the rich man enters the kingdom of heaven; because if He had not first shown us by His passion the form of His humility, our proud stiffness would never have bent itself to His lowliness.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Matthew 19:23-26
But though there be a difference between having and loving riches, yet it is safer neither to have nor to love them.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:23
As long as a man is rich and he has in excess while others do not have even the necessities, he can in no way enter the kingdom of heaven. But when all riches have been shed, then he is not rich and so he can enter. For it is just as impossible for a man with wealth to enter the kingdom of heaven as it is for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. See how Christ first said it was difficult to enter, but here that it is completely impossible. Some say that camel is not the animal, but the thick cable used by sailors to cast their anchors.
[AD 1274] Pseudo-Chrysostom on Matthew 19:23-26
The Gentile souls are likened to the deformed body of the camel, in which is seen the humpback of idolatry; for the knowledge of God is the exaltation of the soul. The needle is the Son of God, the fine point of which is His divinity, and the thicker part what He is according to His incarnation. But it is altogether straight and without turning; and through the womb of His passion, the Gentiles have entered into life eternal. By this needle is sewn the robe of immortality; it is this needle that has sewn the flesh to the spirit, that has joined together the Jews and the Gentiles, and coupled man in friendship with angels. It is easier therefore for the Gentiles to pass through the needle's eye, than for the rich Jews to enter into the kingdom of heaven. For if the Gentiles are with such difficulty withdrawn from the irrational worship of idols, how much more hardly shall the Jews be withdrawn from the reasonable service of God?

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1274] Glossa Ordinaria on Matthew 19:23-26
(ap. Anselm.) The Lord took occasion from this rich man to hold discourse concerning the covetous; Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, &c.

(ap. Anselm.) It is explained otherwise; That at Jerusalem there was a certain gate, called, The needle's eye, through which a camel could not pass, but on its bended knees, and after its burden had been taken off; and so the rich should not be able to pass along the narrow way that leads to life, till he had put off the burden of sin, and of riches, that is, by ceasing to love them.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1963] CS Lewis on Matthew 19:23
The Christian view is that men were created to be in a certain relationship to God (if we are in that relation to Him, the right relation to one another will follow inevitably). Christ said it was difficult for "the rich" to enter the Kingdom of Heaven,1 referring, no doubt, to "riches" in the ordinary sense. But I think it really covers riches in every sense—good fortune, health, popularity, and all the things one wants to have. All these things tend—just as money tends—to make you feel independent of God, because if you have^them you are happy already and contented in this life. You don't want to turn away to anything more, and so you try to rest in a shadowy happiness as if it could last forever. But God wants to give you a real and eternal happiness. Consequently He may have to take all these "riches" away from you: if He doesn't, you will go on relying on them. It sounds cruel, doesn't it? But I am beginning to find out that what people call the cruel doctrines are really the kindest ones in the long run. I used to think it was a "cruel" doctrine to say that troubles and sorrows were "punishments." But I find in practice that when you are in trouble, the moment you regard it as a "punishment," it becomes easier to bear. If you think of this world as a place intended simply for our happiness, you find it quite intolerable: think of it as a place of training and correction and it's not so bad.

Imagine a set of people all living in the same building. Half of them think it is a hotel, the other half think it is a prison. Those who think it a hotel might regard it as quite intolerable, and those who thought it was a prison might decide that it was really surprisingly comfortable. So that what seems the ugly doctrine is one that comforts and strengthens you in the end. The people who try to hold an optimistic view of this world would become pessimists: the people who hold a pretty stern view of it become optimistic.

Source: ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON CHRISTIANITY, from God in the Dock
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:24
Whence it is shown, that there is no ordinary reward for them that are rich, and are able to practise self command. Wherefore also He affirmed it to be a work of God, that He might show that great grace is needed for him who is to achieve this.
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:24-26
(Verse 24 and following) And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, 'Who then can be saved?' But Jesus looked at them and said, 'With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.' This statement shows that it is not difficult, but impossible. For if a camel cannot enter through the eye of a needle, so a rich person cannot enter the kingdom of heaven, no rich person will be saved. But if we read Isaiah, how the camels of Midian and Ephah come to Jerusalem with gifts and offerings (Isa. 60): and how those who were previously bent and distorted by the corruption of vices enter the gates of Jerusalem, we will see how even these camels, to whom the rich are compared, when they have unloaded the heavy burden of sins and the corruption of the whole body, are able to enter through the narrow gate and the narrow way that leads to life (Above 7). But when the disciples asked and were amazed at the severity of his words, he tempered the severity of his statement with his mercy, saying: What is impossible for men is possible for God.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:25
And wherefore are the disciples troubled, being poor, yea, exceedingly poor? Wherefore then are they confounded? Being in pain about the salvation of the rest, and having a great affection for all, and having already taken upon themselves the tender bowels of teachers. They were at least in such trembling and fear for the whole world from this declaration, as to need much comfort.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:25
What then did Christ say? “How difficult it will be for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.” He was not criticizing money itself but the wills of those who are taken captive by it. If it will be difficult for the rich, how much more so for the avaricious! For if stinginess with one’s own wealth is an impediment to gaining the kingdom, think how much fire is amassed for taking someone else’s. But why does he say that it is hard for the rich man to enter the kingdom, to the disciples, who were poor and had nothing? He teaches them not to be ashamed of their poverty and, as it were, gives the reason why he did not allow them to possess anything. After saying it is hard, he also shows them that it is impossible, and not simply impossible but even in an exaggerated way impossible. He shows this from the comparison of the camel and the needle: “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.” Hence Christ demonstrates that there is a significant reward for the wealthy who can practice self-denial. He also said that this had to be the work of God, that he might show that great grace is needed for anyone who is going to achieve it.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 63.2
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:25
The disciples, being compassionate, did not ask this question for their own sake, for they were poor, but for all men. The Lord therefore teaches us not to gauge salvation by human weakness, but by God’s power. If one only begins to cease from greed, he will advance to reducing his excess, and from there he will proceed to eliminating even his necessities, and thus he will be prospered along the way by God acting in collaboration with him.
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:26
It has learnt not to respect life; how much more food? [You ask] "How many have fulfilled these conditions? "But what with men is difficult, with God is easy. Let us, however, comfort ourselves about the gentleness and clemency of God in such wise, as not to indulge our "necessities" up to the point of affinities with idolatry, but to avoid even from afar every breath of it, as of a pestilence.

Source: On Idolatry
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:26
How is it, then, that we read, "With men these things are impossible, but with God all things are possible; " and again, "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise? " Let me ask you, if you were to manumit your slave (seeing that the same flesh and soul will remain to him, which once were exposed to the whip, and the fetter, and the stripes), will it therefore be fit for him to undergo the same old sufferings? I trow not.

Source: On the Resurrection of the Flesh
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:26
In this way they hold the Monarchy, but they hold neither the Father nor the Son. Well, but "with God nothing is impossible." True enough; who can be ignorant of it? Who also can be unaware that "the things which are impossible with men are possible with God? " The foolish things also of the world hath God chosen to confound the things which are wise.

Source: Against Praxeas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:26
Therefore, having first beheld them, He said unto them, The things which are impossible with men, are possible with God. For with a mild and meek look, having soothed their shuddering mind, and having put an end to their distress (for this the evangelist signified by saying, He beheld them), then by His words also He relieves them, bringing before them God's power, and so making them feel confidence.

But if you will learn the manner of it likewise, and how what is impossible may become possible, hear. Born either for this end did He say, The things which are impossible with men, are possible with God, that you should give it up, and abstain, as from things impossible; but that having considered the greatness of the good work, you should hasten to it readily, and having besought God to assist you in these noble contests, should attain unto life.

How then should this become possible? If you cast away what you have, if you empty yourself of your wealth, if you refrain from the wicked desire. For in proof that He does not refer it to God alone, but that to this end He said it, that you should know the vastness of the good work, hear what follows. For when Peter had said, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed You, and had asked, What shall we have therefore? having appointed the reward for them; He added, And every one who has forsaken houses, or lands, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit eternal life. Thus that which is impossible becomes possible. But how may this very thing be done, one may say, to forsake these? How is it possible for him that is once sunk in such lust of wealth, to recover himself? If he begin to empty himself of his possessions, and cut off what are superfluous. For so shall he both advance further, and shall run on his course more easily afterwards.

Do not then seek all at once, but gently, and little by little, ascend this ladder, that leads you up to Heaven. For like as those in fevers having acrid bile abounding within them, when they cast in thereon meats and drinks, so far from quenching their thirst, do even kindle the flame; so also the covetous, when they cast in their wealth upon this wicked lust more acrid than that bile, do rather inflame it. For nothing so stays it as to refrain for a time from the lust of gain, like as acrid bile is stayed by abstinence and evacuations.

But this itself, by what means will it be done? One may say. If you consider, that while rich, you will never cease thirsting, and pining with the lust of more; but being freed from your possessions, you will be able also to stay this disease. Do not then encompass yourself with more, lest you follow after things unattainable, and be incurable, and be more miserable than all, being thus frantic.

For answer me, whom shall we affirm to be tormented and pained? Him that longs after costly meats and drinks, and is not able to enjoy them as he will, or him that has not such a desire? It is quite clear one must say, him that desires, but cannot obtain what he desires. For this is so painful, to desire and not to enjoy, to thirst and not to drink, that Christ desiring to describe hell to us, described it in this way, and introduced the rich man thus tormented. For longing for a drop of water, and not enjoying it, this was his punishment. So then he that despises wealth quiets the desire, but he that desires to be rich has inflamed it more, and not yet does he stay; but though he have got ten thousand talents, he desires as much more; though he obtain these, again he aims at twice as much more, and going on he desires even the mountains, and the earth, and the sea, and all to become gold for him, being mad with a kind of new and fearful madness, and one that can never thus be extinguished.

And that you might learn, that not by addition but by taking away this evil is stayed; if you had ever had an absurd desire to fly and to be borne through the air, how would you extinguish this unreasonable desire? By fashioning wings, and preparing other instruments, or by convincing the mind that it is desiring things impossible, and that one should attempt none of these things? It is quite plain, that by convincing the mind. But that, you may say, is impossible. But this again is more impossible, to find a limit for this desire. For indeed it is more easy for men to fly, than to make this lust cease by an addition of more. For when the objects of desire are possible, one may be soothed by the enjoyment of them, but when they are impossible, one must labor for one thing, to draw ourselves off from the desire, as otherwise at least it is not possible to recover the soul.

Therefore that we may not have superfluous sorrows, let us forsake the love of money that is ever paining, and never endures to hold its peace, and let us remove ourselves to another love, which both makes us happy, and has great facility, and let us long after the treasures above. For neither is the labor here so great, and the gain is unspeakable, and it is not possible for him to fail of them who is but in any wise watchful and sober, and despises the things present; even as on the other hand, as to him that is a slave to these last, and is utterly given up to them, it as altogether of necessity that he fail of those better riches.

Considering then all these things, put away the wicked desire of wealth. For neither couldest thou say this, that it gives the things present, though it deprive us of the things to come, albeit even if this were so, this were extreme punishment, and vengeance. But now not even this may be. For besides hell, and before that hell, even here it casts you into a more grievous punishment. For many houses has this lust overthrown, and fierce wars has it stirred up, and compelled men to end their lives by a violent death; and before these dangers it ruins the nobleness of the soul, and is wont often to make him that has it cowardly, and unmanly, and rash, and false, and calumnious, and ravenous, and over-reaching, and all the worst things.

But seeing perhaps the brightness of the silver, and the multitude of the servants, and the beauty of the buildings, the court paid in the market-place, are you bewitched thereby? What remedy then may there be for this evil wound? If you consider how these things affect your soul, how dark, and desolate, and foul they render it, and how ugly; if you reckon with how many evils these things were acquired, with how many labors they are kept, with how many dangers: or rather they are not kept unto the end, but when you have escaped the attempts of all, death coming on you is often wont to remove these things into the hand of your enemies, and goes and takes you with him destitute, drawing after you none of these things, save the wounds and the sores only, which the soul received from these, before its departing. When then you see any one resplendent outwardly with raiment and large attendance, lay open his conscience, and you shall see many a cobweb within, and much dust. Consider Paul, Peter. Consider John, Elias, or rather the Son of God Himself, who has not where to lay His head. Be an imitator of Him, and of His servants, and imagine to yourself the unspeakable riches of these.

But if having obtained a little sight by these, you should be darkened again, as in any shipwreck when a storm has come on, hear the declaration of Christ, which affirms, that it is impossible for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of Heaven. And against this declaration set the mountains, and the earth, and the sea; and all things, if you will, suppose to be gold; for you shall see nothing equal to the loss arising to you from thence. And thou indeed makest mention of acres of land, so many and so many, and of houses ten or twenty or even more, and of baths as many, and of slaves a thousand, or twice as many, and of chariots fastened with silver and overlaid with gold; but I say this, that if each one of you that are rich were to leave this poverty (for these things are poverty compared with what I am about to say), and were possessed of a whole world, and each of them had as many men as are now everywhere on land and sea, and each a world both sea and land, and everywhere buildings, and cities, and nations, and from every side instead of water, instead of fountains, gold flowed up for him, I would not say those who are thus rich are worth three farthings, when they are cast out of the kingdom.

For if now aiming at riches that perish, when they miss them, they are tormented, if they should obtain a perception of those unspeakable blessings, what then will suffice for consolation for them? There is nothing. Tell me not then of the abundance of their possessions, but consider how great loss the lovers of this abundance undergo in consequence thereof, for these things losing Heaven, and being in the same state, as if any one after being cast out of the highest honor in kings' courts, having a dung heap, were to pride himself on that. For the storing up of money differs nothing from that, or rather that is even the better. For that is serviceable both for husbandry, and for heating a bath, and for other such uses, but the buried gold for none of these things. And would it were merely useless; but as it is, it kindles moreover many furnaces for him that has it, unless he use it rightly; countess evils at least spring therefrom.

Therefore they that are without used to call the love of money the citadel of evils; but the blessed Paul spoke much better and more vividly, pronouncing it the root of all evils.

Considering then all these things, let us emulate the things worthy of emulation, not gorgeous buildings not costly estates, but the men that have much confidence towards God, those that have riches in Heaven, the owners of those treasures, them that are really rich, them that are poor for Christ's sake, that we may attain unto the good things of eternity by the grace and love towards man of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom be unto the Father, together with the Holy Ghost, glory, might, honor, now and always and world without end. Amen.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:26
When the disciples were upset, he said, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” But why were the disciples upset since they were poor, in fact very poor? They were upset for others’ salvation and because they possessed great love toward them all. Already they were taking on the tenderness of teachers. At least they were in such trembling and fear for the whole world from Jesus’ declaration as to need much comfort.And so after Jesus had made eye contact with them, he said, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” So with a pleasant and gentle look, he soothed those whose hearts were terrorized and relieved their anguish (for this is what the Evangelist meant by “looking at him”). Then he uplifted them with his words as he focused on the power of God, and thus he gave them faith.
If you also want to learn the way and how the impossible becomes possible, listen. He did not make this statement that what is impossible for man is possible for God merely so you could relax and do nothing and leave it all to God. No, he said this so you could understand the importance of calling upon God to give you help in this rigorous contest and that you might more readily approach his grace.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 63.2
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:27
If you wish to be the Lord's disciple, it is necessary you "take your cross, and follow the Lord: " your cross; that is, your own straits and tortures, or your body only, which is after the manner of a cross. Parents, wives, children, will have to be left behind, for God's sake. Do you hesitate about arts, and trades, and about professions likewise, for the sake of children and parents? Even there was it demonstrated to us, that both "dear pledges," and handicrafts, and trades, are to be quite left behind for the Lord's sake; while James and John, called by the Lord, do leave quite behind both father and ship; while Matthew is roused up from the toll-booth; while even burying a father was too tardy a business for faith.

Source: On Idolatry
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:27-30
Peter had heard the word of Christ when He said, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast. Then he observed that the young man had departed sorrowful, and considered the difficulty of riches entering into the kingdom of heaven; and thereupon he put this question confidently as one who had achieved no easy matter. For though what he with his brother had left behind them were but little things, yet were they not esteemed as little with God, who considered that out of the fulness of their love they had so forsaken those least things, as they would have forsaken the greatest things if they had had them. So Peter, thinking rather of his will than of the intrinsic value of the sacrifice, asked Him confidently, Behold, we have left all.

It may be said, In all things which the Father revealed to Peter that the Son was, righteousness, sanctification, and the like, in all we have followed Thee. Therefore as a victorious athlete, he now asks what are the prizes of his contest.

Or otherwise; Whosoever shall leave all and follow Christ, he also shall receive those things that were promised to Peter. But if he has not left all, but only those things in special here enumerated, he shall receive manifold, and shall possess eternal life.

And in this world, because for his brethren after the flesh he shall find many brethren in the faith; for parents, all the Bishops and Presbyters; for sons, all that have the age of sons. The Angels also are brethren, and all they are sisters that have offered themselves chaste virgins to Christ, as well they that still continue on earth, as they that now live in heaven. The houses and lands manifold more suppose in the repose of Paradise, and the city of God. And besides all these things they shall possess eternal life.

By this He exhorts those that come late to the heavenly word, to haste to ascend to perfection before many whom they see to have grown old in the faith. This sense may also overthrow those that boast to have been educated in Christianity by Christian parents, especially if those parents have filled the Episcopal see, or the office of Priests or Deacons in the Church; and hinder them from desponding who have entertained the Christian doctrines more newly. It has also another meaning, the first, are the Israelites, who become last because of their unbelief; and the Gentiles who were last become first. He is careful to say, Many; for not all who are first shall be last, nor all last first. For before this have many of mankind, who by nature are the last, been made by an angelic life above the Angels; and some Angels who were first have been made last through their sin.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:27-30
The disciples had followed Christ in the regeneration, that is, in the laver of baptism, in the sanctification of faith, for this is that regeneration which the Apostles followed, and which the Law could not bestow.

Their following Christ in thus exalting the Apostles to twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel, associated them in the glory of the twelve Patriarchs.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:27-30
And this is not said that you should sit supinely, and let alone what may seem impossibilities; but considering the greatness of righteousness, you should strive to enter in with entreaty to God.

(Hom. lxiv.) What was this all, O blessed Peter? The reeds, your net, and boat. But this he says, not to call to mind his own magnanimity, but in order to propose the case of the multitude of poor. A poor man might have said, If I have nought, I cannot become perfect. Peter therefore puts this question that you, poor man, may learn that you are in nothing behind. For he had already received the kingdom of heaven, and therefore secure of what was already there, he now asks for the whole world. And see how carefully he frames his question after Christ's requirements: Christ required two things of a rich man, to give what he had to the poor, and to follow Him; wherefore he adds, and have followed thee.

He therefore said not the Gentiles and the whole world, but, the tribes of Israel, because the Apostles and the Jews had been brought up under the same laws and customs. So that when the Jews should plead that they could not believe in Christ, because they were hindered by their Law, the disciples will be brought forward, who had the same Law. But some one may say, What great thing is this, when both the Ninevites and the Queen of the South will have the same? He had before and will again promise them the highest rewards; and even now He tacitly conveys something of the same. For of those others He had only said, that they shall sit, and shall condemn this generation; but He now says to the disciples, When the Son of Man shall sit, ye also shall sit. It is clear then that they shall reign with Him, and shall share in that glory; for it is such honour and glory unspeakable that He intends by the thrones. How is this promise fulfilled? Shall Judas sit among them? By no means. For the law was thus ordained of the Lord by Jeremiah the Prophet, I will speak it upon my people, and upon the kingdom, that I may build, and plant it. Bui if it do evil in my sight, then will I repent we of the good which I said I would do to them; (Jer. 18:9.) as much as to say, If they make themselves unworthy of the promise, I will no more perform that I promised. But Judas showed himself unworthy of the preeminence; wherefore when He gave this promise to His disciples, He did not promise it absolutely, for He said not, Ye shall sit, but, Ye which, have followed me shall sit; at once excluding Judas, and admitting such as should be in after time; for neither was the promise confined to them only, nor yet did it include Judas who had already shown himself undeserving.

Or; He holds out rewards in the future life to the Apostles, because they were already looking above, and desired nothing of things present; but to others. He promises things present.

But when He says, He that has forsaken wife, it is not to be taken of actual severing of the marriage tie, but that we should hold the ties of the faith dearer than any other. And here is, I think, a covert allusion to times of persecution; for because there should be many who would draw away their sons to heathenism, when that should happen, they should be held neither as fathers, nor husbands.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:27
All which? O blessed Peter; the rod? The net? The boat? The craft? These things do you tell me of, as all? Yea, says he, but not for display do I say these things, but in order that by this question I may bring in the multitude of the poor. For since the Lord had said, If you will be perfect, sell that you have, and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in Heaven; Matthew 19:21 lest any one of the poor should say, What then? If I have no possessions, can I not be perfect? Peter asks, that you, the poor man, may learn, that you are made in no respect inferior by this: Peter asks, that you may not learn from Peter and doubt (for indeed he was imperfect as yet, and void of the Spirit), but that, having received the declaration from Peter's Master, you may be confident.

For like as we do (we make things our own often when speaking of the concerns of others), so did the apostle, when he put to Him this question in behalf of all the world. Since that at least he knew with certainty his own portion, is manifest from what had been said before; for he that had already received the keys of the Heavens, much more might feel confidence about the things hereafter.

But mark also how exactly his reply is according to Christ's demand. For He had required of the rich man these two things, to give that he had to the poor, and to follow Him. Wherefore he also expresses these two things, to forsake, and to follow. For behold we have forsaken all, says he, and have followed You. For the forsaking was done for the sake of following, and the following was rendered easier by the forsaking, and made them feel confidence and joy touching the forsaking.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:27
What is “everything,” blessed Peter? Is it your fishing rod? your net? your boat? your skill? Are you telling me these are the “everything”? “Yes,” he says, “I am not saying these things to show off but in order that by this question I may embrace the multitude of the poor.” For when the Lord said, “If you wish to be perfect, sell what you have and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven,” one of the poor may say, “What then? If I have no possessions, can I not be perfect?” Peter asks the question so that you, the poor man, may learn that you are in no way inferior to the disciples. Peter asks the question, not so that you may have doubts if you learn it from Peter (for he was still imperfect and as yet unfilled by the Spirit) but so that you may hear the word from Peter’s Master and so believe. When we dispute on behalf of others, we often make their concerns our own. That is what the apostle did when he offered this question to the Master on behalf of the wider world of the poor.

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 64.1
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:27-30
Because to forsake is not enough, he adds that which makes perfection, and have followed thee. We have done what thou commandedst us, what reward wilt thou then give us? What shall we have?

He said not only, Ye who have left all, for this did the philosopher Cratesh, and many other who have despised riches, but added, and have followed me, which is peculiar to the Apostles and believers.

Or it may be constructed thus, Ye which have followed me, shall in the regeneration sit, &c.; that is, when the dead shall rise from corruption incorrupt, you also shall sit on thrones of judges, condemning the twelve tribes of Israel, for that they would not believe when you believed.

There are that take occasion from this passage to bring forward the thousand years after the resurrection, and say that then we shall have a hundred fold of the things we have given up, and moreover life eternal. But though the promise be in other things worthy, in the matter of wives it seems to have somewhat shameful, if he who has forsaken one wife for the Lord's sake, shall receive a hundred in the world to come. The meaning is therefore, that he that has forsaken earnal things for the Saviour's sake, shall receive spiritual things, which in a comparison of value are as a hundred to a small number.

And that, And every one that hath forsaken brethren, agrees with that He had said before, I am come to set a man at variance with his father. (Mat. 10:35.) For they who for the faith of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel shall despise all the ties, the riches, and pleasures of this world, they shall receive an hundred fold, and shall possess eternal life.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:27
(Verse 27) Then Peter answered and said to him: Behold, we have left everything and followed you: What therefore will be for us? Great confidence: Peter was a fisherman, he had not been wealthy, he sought food by hand and skill: and yet he speaks confidently, We have left everything. And because it is not enough to just leave, he adds what is perfect: and followed you. We have done what you commanded, so what reward will you give us?

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Matthew 19:27-30
(de Civ. Dei, xx. 5.) Thus our flesh will be regenerated by incorruption, as our soul also shall be regenerated by faith.

(ubi sup.) From this passage we learn that Jesus will judge with His disciples; whence He says in another place to the Jews, Therefore shall they be your judges. (Mat. 12:27.) And whereas He says they shall sit upon twelve thrones, we need not think that twelve persons only shall judge with Him. For by the number twelve is signified the whole number of those that shall judge; and that because the number seven which generally represents completeness contains the two numbers four and three, which multiplied together make twelve. For if it were not so, as Matthias was elected into the place of the traitor Judas, the Apostle Paul who laboured more than they all should not have place to sit to judge; but he shows that he with the rest of the saints pertains to the number of judges, when he says, Know ye not that we shall judge Angels? (1 Cor. 6:3.)

(Serm. 351. 8.) In the number of judges therefore are included all that have left their all and followed the Lord;

(de Civ. Dei, xx. 5.) The same holds good, by reason of this number twelve, of those that are to be judged. For when it is said, Judging the twelve tribes, yet is not the tribe of Levi, which is the thirteenth, to be exempt from being judged by them; nor shall they judge this nation alone, and not also other nations.

(De Civ. Dei, xx. 7.) That He says, An hundred fold, is explained by the Apostle, when he says, As having nothing, and yet possessing all things. (2 Cor. 6:10.) For a hundred is sometimes put for the whole universe.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 533] Remigius of Rheims on Matthew 19:27-30
It may also be referred in particular to the rich man, who seemed to be first, by his fulfilment of the precepts of the Law, but was made last by his preferring his worldly substance to God. The holy Apostles seemed to be last, but by leaving all they were made first by the grace of humility. There are many who having entered upon good works, fall therefrom, and from having been first, become last.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 604] Gregory the Dialogist on Matthew 19:27-30
(Mor. x. 31.) For whosoever, urged by the spur of divine lore, shall forsake what he possesses here, shall without doubt gain there the eminence of judicial authority; and shall appear as judge with the Judge, for that he now in consideration of the judgment chastens himself by a voluntary poverty.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Matthew 19:27-30
But because many with what zeal they take up the pursuit of virtue, do not with the same complete it; but either grow cool, or fall away rapidly; it follows, But many that are first shall be last, and the last first.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:27
Even though it seems that Peter had not forsaken very much, as he was poor, understand that in actuality he, too, forsook much. For the fewer possessions we have, the greater the attachment. But Peter also rejected every worldly pleasure, even natural affection for his parents. For these passions war against the poor as well as the rich. What then does the Lord answer?
[AD 1274] Pseudo-Chrysostom on Matthew 19:27-30
For it would come to pass, that in the day of judgment the Jews would allege, Lord, we knew Thee not to be the Son of God when Thou wast in the flesh. For who can discern a treasure buried in the ground, or the sun when obscured by a cloud? The disciples therefore will then answer, We also were men, and peasants, obscure among the multitude, but you priests and scribes; but in us a right will became as it were a lamp of our ignorance, but your evil will became to you a blinding of your science.

Or, by that, In the regeneration, Christ designs the period of Christianity that should be after His ascension, in which men were regenerated by baptism; and that is the time in which Christ sate on the throne of His glory. And hereby you may see that He spake not of the time of the judgment to come, but of the calling of the Gentiles, in that He said not, When the Son of Man shall come sitting upon the throne of his majesty; but only, In the regeneration when he shall sit, which was from the time that the Gentiles began to believe on Christ; according to that, God shall reign over the heathen; God sitteth upon his holy throne. (Ps. 47:8.) From that time also the Apostles have sat upon twelve thrones, that is, over all Christians; for every Christian who receives the word of Peter, becomes Peter's throne, and so of the rest of the Apostles. On these thrones then the Apostles sit, parcelled into twelve divisions, after the variety of minds and hearts, known to God only. For as the Jewish nation was split into twelve tribes, so is the whole Christian people divided into twelve, so as that some souls are numbered with the tribe of Reuben, and so of the rest, according to their several qualities. For all have not all graces alike, one is excellent in this, another in that. And so the Apostles will judge the twelve tribes of Israel, that is, all the Jews, by this, that the Gentiles received the Apostles' word. The whole body of Christians are indeed twelve thrones for the Apostles, but one throne for Christ. For all excellencies are but one throne for Christ, for He alone is equally perfect in all virtues. But of the Apostles each one is more perfect in some one particuar excellence, as Peter in faith; so Peter tests upon his faith, John on his innocence, and so of the rest. And that Christ spake of reward to be given to the Apostles in this world, is shown by what follows, And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, &c. For if these shall receive an hundred fold in this life, without doubt to the Apostles also was promised a reward in this present life.

Source: Catena Aurea by Aquinas
[AD 220] Tertullian on Matthew 19:28
For avoiding it, remedies cannot be lacking; since, even if they be lacking, there remains that one by which you will be made a happier magistrate, not in the earth, but in the heavens.

Source: On Idolatry
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Matthew 19:28
In gift giving it is not the gift itself that God praises and approves but the will and sincerity of the giver. He excuses and holds more acceptable the one who gave less but gave it with more perfect sincerity than the one who gave more from a fuller store but with less pure affection. Thus, from what is written about the gifts of the wealthy and from the two mites which the widow in the treasury sent for the poor, it is clear that the same also happens to those who leave everything that they possess for the love of God so as to follow undistractedly the Christ of God. They will do everything according to his word. The one who leaves the greater wealth is not more acceptable than the one who leaves the lesser. This is especially so if he leaves the lesser with his whole heart. What Peter left, along with his brother Andrew, was small and of no value, but when they both heard, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men, immediately they left their nets and followed him.” Yet they were not valued lightly by God, who knew that they had done this with great love. God knew that even if they had been endowed with much wealth they would still not have been distracted by it, nor would their desire to follow Jesus have been thwarted by it.… Those who follow the Savior, therefore, will sit on the twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel and will receive this power in the resurrection of the dead. For this is the regeneration, a new birth, when the new heaven and the new earth are established for those who renew themselves, and a New Testament with its chalice is given.

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 15.21-22
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:28
What then, one may say, shall Judas sit there? By no means. How, then, does He say, You shall sit on twelve thrones? how shall the terms of the promise be fulfilled?

Hear how, and on what principle. There is a law ordained of God, recited by Jeremiah, the prophet to the Jews, and in these words: At what instant I shall speak a sentence concerning a nation and kingdom, to pluck up and destroy; if that nation turn from their evil deeds, I also will repent of the evils, which I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation and kingdom to build and to plant it; and if they do evil in my sight, that they obey not my voice, I also will repent of the good, which I said I would do unto them. Jeremiah 18:7-10

For the same custom do I observe with respect to the good things as well, says He. For though I spoke of building up, should they show themselves unworthy of the promise, I will no longer do it. Which sort of thing was done with respect to man upon his creation, For the dread of you, it is said, and the fear of you shall be on the wild beasts, Genesis 9:2 and it came not to pass, for he proved himself unworthy of the sovereignty, even as did Judas also.

For in order that neither at the denunciations of punishment any men should despair and become more hardened, nor by the promises of good things be rendered causelessly more remiss, He remedies both these evils, by that which I have before mentioned, saying in this way: Though I should threaten, do not despair; for you are able to repent, and to reverse the denunciation, like the Ninevites. Though I should promise any good thing, grow not remiss because of the promise. For should you appear unworthy, the fact of my having promised will not advantage you, but will rather bring punishment. For I promise you being worthy.

Therefore even then in His discourse with His disciples He did not promise to them simply, for neither did He say, you, only, but added, which have followed me, that He might both cast out Judas, and draw towards Him those that should come afterwards. For neither to them only was it said, nor to Judas any more, when he had become unworthy.

Now to the disciples He promised things to come, saying, You shall sit on twelve thrones, for they were now of a higher stamp, and sought after none of the things of the present world, but to the rest He promises also what are here.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:28
But what does it mean that they will “judge the twelve tribes of Israel”? It means they will judge them insufficient and convicted. For they are not going to sit as jurymen. But just as he said that the queen of the south is to judge that generation and the Ninevites will condemn them, so will these too. For this reason he did not say “the nations and the world” but “the tribes of Israel.” The Jews and the apostles had been brought up in the same laws and customs and political system. When the Jews said that they were not able to believe in Christ because the law forbade them to receive his commandments, he brings forward these people who had received the same law and had believed, and thus he condemns all those others. That is why he had already said, “Therefore they shall be your judges.”

Source: THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 64.2
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:28
[Daniel 7:9] "I beheld until thrones were set up, and the Ancient of days took His seat. His garment was as white as snow, and the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was composed of fiery flames and its wheels were set on fire. From before His presence there issued forth a rushing, fiery stream." We read something similar in John's Apocalypse: "After these things I was immediately in the Spirit, and lo, a throne was set up in heaven, and one was seated upon the throne; and He who sat upon it had the likeness of jasper and sardine stone, and there was a rainbow round about the throne like the appearance of emerald. Around the throne there were twenty-four other thrones, and upon the twenty-four thrones there sat twenty-four elders, clothed in shining garments; upon their heads was a golden crown, and lightning flashes issued from the throne, and voices and thunder. And in front of the throne there were seven torches of burning fire, which were the seven spirits of God. And in front of the throne lay a glassy sea like unto crystal." (Revelation 4:2-6) And so the many thrones which Daniel saw seem to me to be what John called the twenty-four thrones. And the Ancient of days is the One who, according to John sits alone upon His throne. Likewise the Son of man, who came unto the Ancient of days, is the same as He who, according to John, is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, and the titles of that sort (Revelation 5:5). I imagine that these thrones are the ones of which the Apostle Paul says, "Whether thrones or dominions..." (Colossians 1:16). And in the Gospel we read, "Ye yourselves shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Matthew 19:28). And God is called the One who sits and who is the Ancient of days, in order that His character as eternal Judge might be indicated. His garment is shining white like the snow, and the hair of His head is like pure wool. The Savior also, when He was transfigured on the mount and assumed the glory of His divine majesty, appeared in shining white garments (Matthew 17:2). And as for the fact that His hair is compared to perfectly pure wool, the even-handedness and uprightness of His judgment is shown forth, a judgment which shows no partiality in its exercise. Moreover He is described as an elderly man, in order that the ripeness of His judgment may be established. His throne consists of fiery flames, in order that sinners may tremble before the severity of the torments, and also that the just may be saved, but so as by fire. The wheels of the throne are set aflame, or else it is the wheels of His chariot which are aflame. In Ezekiel also God is ushered on the scene seated in a four-horse chariot (Ezekiel 1:4-28), and everything pertaining to God is of a fiery consistency. In another place also a statement is made on this subject: "God is a consuming fire" (Deuteronomy 4:24), that we might know that wood, hay and stubble are going to burn up in the day of judgment. And in the Psalms we read: "Fire goeth before Him, and He shall set aflame all His enemies round about Him" (Psalm 97:3). A rushing, fiery stream proceeded from before Him in order that it might carry sinners to hell (Gehenna).

Source: St. Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, CHAPTER SEVEN
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:28
(Verse 28.) But Jesus said to them: Amen I say to you, that you who have followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. He did not say: you who have left all things, for this Crates the philosopher also did, and many others despised riches; but you who have followed me: which properly belongs to the apostles and believers. In the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, you will also sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: because they refused to believe in Him, who believed in you.

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:28
Surely they will not be seated? (2) Of course not, but He indicated by means of a throne the great honor they will enjoy. Will Judas also be seated? No; for Christ said, which have followed Me, that is, "followed Me to the end," but Judas did not follow to the end. By a different interpretation, God often promises good things to those who are worthy. But if they should change and become unworthy, as Judas did, those good things are denied. Similarly with more menacing things, He often threatens but does not carry out the threat, because we have repented. By regeneration understand the resurrection of the dead at the Last Judgement.
[AD 319] Theodore Stratelates on Matthew 19:29
“A hundredfold” means that which is incomparably better as regards the future in heaven. When Mark says he will receive a hundredfold “in this age,” we should understand him as speaking about spiritual joys far exceeding earthly ones, inasmuch as they are pledges of future blessings.

Source: FRAGMENT 107
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Matthew 19:29
They followed him in the washing of baptism, the sanctification of the faith, in the adoption of the inheritance and in the resurrection from the dead. For this is that regeneration that the apostles received and that the law could not grant. It joined them together above the twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, to the glory of the twelve patriarchs. To others following him in scorn of the secular world, he promises the abundance of hundredfold harvests. This hundredfold harvest is the same as that which is filled with heavenly joy at the hundredth sheep. This hundredfold harvest is that which the fruitfulness of the perfected earth will provide. This honor was also destined to the church in Sarah’s name. This honor will be merited through the loss of the law and the faith of the gospel. And thus he says that the first are to be made from the last because the last are made from the first.

Source: Commentary on Matthew 20.4
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:29
For lest any after having heard the word ye, should suppose this a thing peculiar to the disciples (I mean now the enjoying the greatest and first honors in the things to come), He extended the word, and spread the promise over the whole earth, and from the things present establishes the things to come also. And to the disciples also at the beginning, when they were in a more imperfect state, He reasoned from the things present. For when He drew them from the sea, and took them from their trade, and commanded them to forsake the ships, He made mention not of Heaven, not of thrones, but of the things here, saying, I will make you fishers of men; but when He had wrought them to be of higher views, then after that He discourses of the things to come also.

But what is, Judging the twelve tribes of Israel? This is, condemning them. For they are not surely to sit as judges, but like as He said the Queen of the South should condemn that generation, and the Ninevites shall condemn them; so now these also. Therefore He said not, the nations, and the world, but the tribes of Israel. For since both the Jews alike and the apostles had been brought up under the same laws, and customs, and polity; when the Jews said, that for this cause they could not believe in Christ, because the law forbade to receive His commandments, by bringing forward these men, who had received the same law, and yet had believed, He condemns all those; like as even already He had said, therefore they shall be your judges. Matthew 12:27

And what great thing does He promise them, it may be said, if what the Ninevites have and the Queen of the South, this these are to have also? In the first place He had promised them many other things before this, and after this does promise them, and this alone is not their reward.

And besides even in this He intimated by the way something more than these things. For of those He simply said, The men of Nineveh shall rise up and condemn this gen eration, Matthew 12:41 and, The Queen of the South shall condemn it; but concerning these, not merely thus, but how? When the Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of His glory, then shall you also sit upon twelve thrones, says He, declaring, that they also shall reign with Him, and partake of that glory. For if we suffer, it is said, we shall also reign with Him. 2 Timothy 2:12 For neither do the thrones signify a sitting (in judgment), for He alone is the one that shall sit and judge, but honor and glory unspeakable did He intimate by the thrones.

To these then He spoke of these things, but to all the rest of eternal life and an hundredfold here. But if to the rest, much more to these too, both these things, and the things in this life.

And this surely came to pass; for when they had left a fishing rod and a net, they possessed with authority the substances of all, the prices of the houses and the lands, and the very bodies of the believers. For often did they choose even to be slain for their sake, as Paul also bears witness to many, when he says, If it had been possible ye would have plucked out your eyes, and given them to me. Galatians 4:51 But when He says, Every one who has forsaken wife, He says not this, for marriages to be broken asunder for nought, but as He says concerning one's life, He that loses his life for my sake shall find it, Matthew 10:39 not that we should destroy ourselves, neither that while yet here we should part it from the body, but that we should prefer godliness to all things; this too He says also with respect to wife and brethren.

But He seems to me here to intimate also the persecutions. For since there were many instances both of fathers urging their sons to ungodliness, and wives their husbands; when they command these things, says He, let them be neither wives nor parents, even as Paul likewise said, But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. 1 Corinthians 7:15
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:29-30
(Verse 29, 30.) And everyone who has left houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or fields for my name's sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall possess eternal life. But many who are first shall be last, and the last first. This passage is in agreement with that saying in which the Savior speaks: 'I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.' (Matthew 10:34) Therefore, those who for the sake of the faith of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel have despised all affections, as well as riches and worldly pleasures: they will receive a hundredfold and possess eternal life. In connection with this statement, some introduce the idea of a thousand years after the resurrection, saying that then a hundredfold of all the things we have given up will be restored to us, and eternal life will be given: not understanding that if in other matters there is a worthy promise, in the case of wives there appears a shameful thing; so that one who leaves one for the Lord will receive a hundred in the future. Therefore, this is the meaning: Whoever renounces earthly things for the sake of the Savior will receive heavenly things, which will be suitable and proportionate to the merit of the renunciation, as if a small number were compared to a hundred. Thus the Apostle says, he who has renounced only one house and the small fields of one province: As if having nothing, and possessing all things (2 Corinthians 6:10).

Source: Commentary on Matthew
[AD 420] Jerome on Matthew 19:29
So the meaning is this: He who has given up the carnal for the Savior will receive the spiritual. In comparison and merit this will be as if a small number were compared with a number in the hundreds. Hence the apostle, who had given up only a house and his small provincial fields, also says, “As having nothing, and yet possessing everything.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.19.30
[AD 444] Cyril of Alexandria on Matthew 19:29
So that no one should think that what was said applied only to the disciples, he extended the words to cover all those doing likewise. The rest might not receive the same as the disciples; yet instead of their relatives of the flesh they will have kinship with God and fraternity with the saints. In fact, he means the older men and women of the church, who were, as it were, relatives through love, beloved from disposition, who loved them much more than their relatives of the flesh. They also received money from them to spend as they wished, while the future treasures were laid up in store for them. Instead of their fields they will receive paradise. They will receive paradise instead of their fields. They will receive Jerusalem above, the mother of their firstborn, in place of their houses built of stone.

Source: FRAGMENT 221
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:29
So that no one would think that what was said applied only to the disciples, Christ broadened the promise to include everyone who does likewise. They will have, instead of family of the flesh, intimacy and brotherhood with God; instead of lands, Paradise; instead of houses of stone, the heavenly Jerusalem; instead of a mother, the venerable mothers in the Church; instead of a father, the priests; instead of a wife, all the faithful women, not in marriage—far from it!—but in affection and spiritual relation and compassionate care for them. The Lord does not bid us simply to separate from our families, but only when they impede our piety. In the same manner, He bids us to despise even our own life and body, but not with the result that we slay ourselves. See how good God is: He not only gives us these good things, but adds to them eternal life. You, then, O reader, hasten to sell your possessions and give to the poor. Possessions are, to the wrathful man, his anger; to the fornicator, his disposition for debauchery; to the resentful, his remembrance of wrongs. Sell these things and give them to the poor demons who are in want of every good thing. Return the passions to the creators of the passions, and then you will have treasure, which is Christ, in your heaven, that is, in your mind which has been exalted above this world. For he who becomes like the heavenly One has heaven within himself.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Matthew 19:30
When He had then raised the spirit of all, and had persuaded them to feel confidence both with respect to themselves and to all the world, He added, that Many that were first shall be last, and last first. But this although it be spoken also without distinction concerning many others likewise, it is spoken also concerning these men and concerning the Pharisees, who did not believe, even as before also He had said, Many shall come from east and west and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out. Matthew 8:11-12
[AD 604] Gregory the Dialogist on Matthew 19:30
Mor., x, 31: For whosoever, urged by the spur of divine love, shall forsake what he possesses here, shall without doubt gain there the eminence of judicial authority; and shall appear as judge with the Judge, for that he now inconsideration of the judgment chastens himself by a voluntary poverty.
[AD 1107] Theophylact of Ohrid on Matthew 19:30
Christ is suggesting here the Jews and the Gentiles. For the Jews, who were first, became last, while the Gentiles, who were last, were put first.