But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

“Then the disciples recount the divers opinions of the Jews relating to Christ; And they said, Some say John the Baptist, following Herod’s opinion; others Elias, (vid. Matt. 14:2.) supposing either that Elias had gone through a second birth, or that having continued alive in the body, He had at this time appeared; others Jeremias, whom the Lord had ordained to be Prophet among the Gentiles, not understanding that Jeremias was a type of Christ; or one of the Prophets, in a like way, because of those things which God spoke to them through the Prophets, yet they were not fulfilled in them, but in Christ.”

“Above, the Lord taught that evangelical doctrine must be kept pure from the leaven of the Jews; here, however, he teaches the eminence of that doctrine. And first as to faith in both natures, namely the Godhead and the manhood; second as to faith in the Passion, at the place "From that time Jesus began to show to his disciples," etc.; third as to faith in the power of judgment, at the place "For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father." Concerning the first, first the opinion of the crowds about Christ is inquired into; second the faith of the disciples, at the place "But whom do you say that I am?" Concerning the first, first the place is set down; second Christ's question, at the place "Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?"; third Peter's response, at the place "But they said," etc. He says, therefore, "Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea"; and not only this, but he added "Philippi," because there were two Caesareas, namely Caesarea of Trachonitis, where Peter was sent to Cornelius, and this other one, which is otherwise called Paneas. The first was established by Herod in honor of Caesar Augustus; this one Philip built in honor of Tiberius. But why did the Lord raise this question here? It must be said that this city was situated within the borders of the Jews; therefore, before he wished to ask about the faith, he drew them out from among the Jews. Likewise it is recorded that the Lord, leading the Jews out of Egypt, did not lead them out through the land of the Philistines, as is found in Exodus 13:17. Next is set down the question: "And he asked his disciples," etc. A wise man, when he asks, teaches, as Jerome says. Hence we are instructed in many things, that we should be solicitous about what is said of us: so that if it is evil, we may correct it; if good, that we may preserve and increase it. Hence take care of a good name; for this will remain with you more than a thousand precious and great treasures, Ecclesiasticus 41:15. Hence Christ asked what was said about him. Likewise, those who know the Godhead are called gods, Psalm 81:6: "I have said, you are gods"; but those who know the manhood are called men; hence it is said, "Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?" But, as Hilary says, Christ seemed to be only a man; therefore he wished that they should recognize that there was something else in him besides. Hence from this very question he gives them to understand that there was something else in him. Likewise the humility of Christ is shown, because he confesses himself to be the Son of Man, according to that above, Matthew 11:29: "Learn of me, because I am meek and humble of heart." Next is set down the opinion of the crowds: "But they said: some John the Baptist," etc. Different people held different opinions about Christ. The Pharisees blasphemed Christ, but the crowds called him a prophet; hence Luke 7:16: "A great prophet has risen up among us," etc. They said he was John by reason of his authority, because John preached penance; above, chapter 3:2: "Do penance, the kingdom of heaven is at hand." Therefore they believed him to be John, because Christ likewise began, "Do penance, the kingdom of heaven is at hand," as above, 4:17. Likewise they held the prophet Elijah in reverence; Malachi, last chapter, 5: "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." Hence they believed him to be Elijah on account of the power of his speech and the might of his preaching; Ecclesiasticus 48:1: "And Elijah the prophet stood up as fire, because his word burned like a torch." And of Christ it is said above, 7:29, that he was "teaching them as one having power." Likewise, on account of the eminence of his life, they believed him to be Jeremiah, of whom the Lord said: "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you came forth from the womb, I sanctified you," Jeremiah 1:5. And in the same book, chapter 40, it is recorded that he was honored by the Gentiles. Thus Christ was held in reverence by those outside the nation, but was blasphemed by the Jews; therefore they compared him to Jeremiah. But how could they say he was Elijah? Because it is recorded in 4 Kings 2:11 that he was carried up, and that he still lived, and he had been promised to the Jews for their salvation, as is found in Malachi, last chapter, 5. Because some held the theory of transmigration of bodies, and so according to this opinion it could be that the soul of Elijah had entered another body. "Jesus says to them: But whom do you say that I am?" Here the faith of the disciples is inquired into. And first the question is set down; second the response; third the approval. The second is at "Peter answering"; the third at "And Jesus answering," etc. "Jesus says to them: But whom do you say that I am?" As if to say: thus say the crowds; but because more has been entrusted to you, therefore more is required of you. You have seen miracles, therefore you ought to hold a higher opinion. But why did he ask? Did he not know? Indeed he knew, but he wished that they should merit from their confession; Romans 10:10: "With the heart we believe unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." Hence the more secluded things are, the more meritorious they are; and since the crowds, as being of the lowest understanding, could not answer greater things, therefore, etc. "But Peter answering said: You are Christ, the Son of the living God." He answers for himself and for the others; but he more often answers, and in this the perfect faith is touched upon, because faith in the manhood is touched. "You are Christ," that is, the anointed one. And it is agreed that he was anointed with the oil of the Holy Spirit. Anointing does not belong to him according to the Godhead, because it proceeds from the Godhead itself, but according to the manhood. This, therefore, he says so that they might esteem the manhood of Christ otherwise than the crowds did. But it is asked why they called him a prophet. A prophet was anointed, as is found of Elisha. Kings were anointed, as is found of Saul; likewise priests, as is found in Leviticus. And all these things are implied in the name of Christ: because he is also called king, as Jeremiah 23:5: "A king shall reign, and he shall be wise." Likewise priest; Psalm 109:4: "You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech." Likewise prophet: "The Lord your God will raise up to you a prophet from your nation and from your brethren," etc., Deuteronomy 18:15. Likewise he confessed not only the manhood, but, piercing through the outer shell, he transcended even to the Godhead, saying "You are the Son of God." For others said that he was a blasphemer; hence John 10:33: "For a good work we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, because being a man you make yourself God." But this man recognizes him as the Son of God. And he says "of the living God," to exclude the error of the Gentiles, who called certain dead men gods, as Jove, etc., as is found in Wisdom 13:2ff. Likewise certain ones called dead elements gods, such as earth, fire, etc., as is found in Wisdom 13; but this man says "the Son of the living God." But it must be known that when it is said "the living God" and "a living man," it is said of man by participation in life; but it is said of God because he is the fountain of life; Psalm 35:10: "With you is the fountain of life." And in John 14:6: "I am the way, the truth, and the life." "Jesus answering," etc. Here first he approves his confession; second he commands that it be kept silent, at the place "Then he commanded his disciples that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ." Concerning the first, first he approves this confession by the commendation of the one confessing; second by the reward, at the place "And I say to you that you are Peter," etc. Hence he says, "Jesus answered: Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona." "Bar" is the same as "son"; "Jona" is the same as "dove": by his own name. Hence "Bar-Jona," that is, son of the dove. And Christ's response seems to answer to Peter's confession. Because he had confessed him to be the Son of God, Jesus in turn calls him son of the dove, namely of the Holy Spirit, because this confession could not have been made except by the Holy Spirit. But it is believed that at first he was called "Bar-Jona," that is, son of John, but through a corruption of the text it came to be said this way. But what of it? Did not others confess him to be the Son of God? Indeed, we read of Nathanael, John 1:49. Likewise those who were in the boat, above, chapter 9. Why then is Peter here declared blessed, and not the others? Because the others confessed him as adopted son, but this one confessed him as natural son; therefore he is here declared blessed above the rest, because he first confessed the Godhead. Origen says: it seems that before this he had not confessed it. But then how did Christ send them out to preach? He answers that from the beginning they did not preach that he was the Christ, but they preached penance. Likewise it could be that they did preach Christ, but here for the first time they preached that he himself was the Son of God. Therefore here he especially rewards him. "Blessed are you, Simon," etc., because blessedness consists in knowledge; John 17:3: "This is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God." But knowledge is twofold: one which is by natural reason, the other which is above reason. The first does not make for blessedness, because it is uncertain; hence it does not satisfy the intellect; but blessedness must satisfy natural appetite, and this will be had in our homeland; Isaiah 64:4: "The eye has not seen, nor has the ear heard, what the Lord has prepared for those who love him." Therefore in this life, the more anyone can perceive of this knowledge, the more he is blessed; Proverbs 3:13: "Blessed is he who finds wisdom." Hence he says "Blessed are you," because you are beginning to be blessed. "Because flesh and blood has not revealed it to you." This can be explained so that flesh and blood are taken for carnal friends; Galatians 1:16: "immediately I did not consult flesh and blood." Hence "flesh and blood has not revealed it to you," that is, you did not have it from the tradition of the Jews, but from the revelation of God. Likewise, in Christ there was flesh, and blood, and Godhead; therefore, because Peter did not look to flesh and blood, it is said to him "Blessed are you," because you do not judge according to what flesh and blood reveals, but according to what my Father reveals. Or: you do not have it from natural industry, but from my Father. "For no one has known the Son except the Father," Luke 10:22. For it belongs to him to reveal, whose it is to know. Hence "no one knows except him to whom the Father has willed to reveal it"; Daniel 2:28: "There is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries." "And I say to you, that you are Peter," etc. Here he gives the reward of the confession. He had confessed the manhood and the Godhead, therefore the Lord gives the reward. First he gives the name; second, the power. Concerning the first, first he gives the name; second, the reason for the name, at the place "and upon this rock I will build my church." And for this he came into this world, that he might found the church. Isaiah 28:16: "Behold, I will lay in the foundations of Sion a tried stone, a corner stone, a precious stone, founded in the foundation." This is signified by the stone which Jacob placed under his head, and anointed, as is found in Genesis 28:18. This stone is Christ, and from this anointing all are called Christians; hence we are called Christians not only from Christ, but from the rock (petra). Therefore he especially imposes the name: "You are Peter," from the rock which is Christ. Although according to Augustine it seems that the name was not imposed now, but from the beginning; John 1:42: "You shall be called Cephas." Or it can be said that it was promised then, and given here. In sign of this, "upon this rock I will build my church." It is the property of a rock, that it be placed as a foundation; likewise, that it give firmness. Above, 7:24: "He is like a man who builds his house upon a rock." Hence it can be explained of Christ: "and upon this rock," that is, upon Christ, so that he might be the foundation, and so that what is founded might receive firmness. Augustine, in the book of Retractations, says that he explained this in many ways, and left it to his hearers to accept whichever they wished. Either that "this rock" signifies Christ; 1 Corinthians 10:4: "And the rock was Christ." And elsewhere, 1 Corinthians 3:11: "No other foundation can anyone lay, but that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus." Another explanation: "upon this rock," that is, upon you the rock, because from me you, as a rock, draw the fact that you are a rock. And just as I am the rock, so upon you as rock I will build, etc. But what of this? Are both Christ and Peter the foundation? It must be said that Christ is the foundation according to himself, but Peter insofar as he has the confession of Christ, insofar as he is his vicar. Ephesians 2:20: "Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone," etc. Apocalypse 21:14: "The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." Therefore Christ according to himself is the foundation, but the apostles not according to themselves, but by the concession of Christ, and the authority given by Christ; Psalm 86:1: "The foundations thereof are in the holy mountains." But especially Peter's house, which is founded upon the rock, shall not be destroyed, as above, 7:25. Thus this church can be assailed, but cannot be conquered. "And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Jeremiah 1:19: "They shall fight against you, and shall not prevail." And who are the gates of hell? Heretics: because just as one enters a house through a gate, so through these one enters into hell. Likewise tyrants, demons, sins. And although other churches could be reviled by heretics, the Roman Church nevertheless was not depraved by heretics, because it was founded upon the rock. Hence at Constantinople there were heretics, and the labor of the apostles was lost there; only the Church of Peter remained inviolate. Hence Luke 22:32: "I have prayed for you, Peter, that your faith fail not." And this refers not only to the Church of Peter, but to the faith of Peter, and to the whole Western Church. Hence I believe that Westerners owe greater reverence to Peter than to the other apostles. "And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." Here is set down the second gift which Christ gave to Peter according to his manhood. For he founded the church on earth, and instituted Peter as his vicar, that he might lead men into heaven; Hebrews 10:19: "Having confidence in the entrance into the holies by the blood of Christ." Hence Christ instituted Peter as his vicar, that he might lead men into heaven; hence he gave him that ministry, hence he gave the keys. For a key introduces; hence Peter has the ministry of introducing. And he does two things. First he entrusts the keys; second he teaches their use: "and whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in heaven," etc. But let us see what the keys are. When a house is locked, this impedes entrance; but the key removes the impediment. The kingdom of heaven had an impediment, but not on its own part; Apocalypse 4:1: "I saw, and behold a door was opened"; but the impediment was on our part, namely sin, because "nothing defiled shall enter into it." Christ removed these impediments through his Passion, because "he washed us from our sins in his own blood," Apocalypse 1:5. And he communicated this, so that through a ministry sins might be taken away, which is accomplished through the power of the blood of Christ; hence the sacraments have their power from the power of the Passion of Christ. Hence, "I will give you the ministry," etc. Isaiah 22:22: "I will lay upon him the key of the house of David." But he says "I will give you"; for they were not yet fashioned; but a thing cannot be given before it exists. These, however, were to be fashioned in the Passion; hence in the Passion was their efficacy. Hence here he promised, but after the Passion he gave, when he said: "Feed my sheep." But why does he say "keys"? Because to absolve is to remove an obstacle. For there are two things, because two are required, power and knowledge. But what of this? Are there not some priests who do not have knowledge? Understand that they do have knowledge, because no one has the key of knowledge except a priest. Here "knowledge" does not mean a habit of the intellect, etc., but it means the authority of discerning. Hence there is a certain judge who does not have knowledge in the first sense, and yet has knowledge in the second sense, because he has authority; while another has knowledge in the first sense, and not in the second, because he does not have authority. Hence "knowledge" here means the authority of discerning, and every priest has this, so as to discern in absolving. Next he sets down the use of the keys: "whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in heaven." But it seems that this is unsuitably stated, because the use of a key is not to bind, but to open. I say that this use of the keys is indeed fitting. For heaven itself is open; Apocalypse 4:1: "I saw a door opened." Hence it is not necessary that it be opened; but he who is bound and ought to enter must be loosed. But here certain errors are to be avoided. The first is touched on in the Gloss, because certain people usurped the claim that they could absolve whomever they wished, and lead them into the kingdom of heaven. But this cannot stand, because it belongs to God alone to change wills. Another error is that the priest does not bind, but only shows that one is absolved. But this detracts from the power of the sacrament, since the sacraments of the new law effect what they signify; but the sacraments of the old law do not. Hence if it effected nothing, it would not be a sacrament of the new law. Third, some say that in sin there are three things: guilt, and liability, and punishment. From two of these a man is absolved by himself through contrition; but when a man has been absolved from these, he remains obligated to temporal punishment, which a man is not able by himself to remove and avoid; therefore the keys are given, which lessen something of this punishment, and bind as to some part of the punishment. Yet it seems to me that this is not well said, because a sacrament of the new law gives grace, but grace is not ordered against punishment, but against guilt. Hence I say that it is the same in this sacrament of confession as in the sacrament of Baptism, which has a certain instrumental spiritual power, according to which it cleanses from guilt. Hence Augustine: "What is the power of water, that it should wash the flesh, and take away guilt?" Thus I say that in the priest there is a certain instrumental spiritual power, from which he is called a minister, and thus he ministerially effects the remission, just as the water of Baptism does. But here a difficulty arises, because now only infants come to Baptism; and if an adult comes, he comes either feigned or not feigned. He comes feigned when he comes without renewal of mind, and then guilt is not remitted; he comes not feigned when he comes with the purpose of confession, whence grace is required, or the purpose of conversion, and this is from grace. But grace takes away guilt. Hence in the sacrament of Baptism, when an adult comes, if he prepares himself, he receives the remission of guilt. So too in the sacrament of penance, to which only adults come, one is not contrite unless he has the purpose of submitting himself to the discretion and judgment of the priest. If he is not contrite, he does not obtain the effect, just as in Baptism. But it can happen that someone comes not wholly contrite, who by the power of the grace conferred in the perfected sacrament is made contrite; therefore it must be understood: "whatsoever you shall loose," that is, if you apply the ministry of absolution. And he says "whatsoever," because not only guilt, but punishment. "It shall be loosed in heaven," that is, it shall be held as absolved in heaven, just as is the case with Baptism; hence the priest ought to say "I absolve you," just as "I baptize you." But someone may ask, how does he bind? It must be known that the priest is a minister of God, and the action of the minister depends on the act of the lord; hence in the manner in which the lord binds and looses, so does the priest ministerially. God looses by pouring in grace, he binds by not pouring it in: thus the priest looses by the sacrament, ministering the sacrament, but binds by not applying it. It is said otherwise, that by "heavens" the present Church is signified; hence "whatsoever you shall bind," by excommunication, or "shall loose," it shall be loosed or bound, as regards the administration of the sacraments of the Church. Hence some hold that this administration, this binding and absolving, is upon earth, so that it does not extend to the dead. But this is rejected, because it extends not only to the living, but also to the dead; hence if it is referred to both, the sense is: "whatsoever you shall bind on earth"—then I say, existing on earth—"shall be bound also in heaven." But there is another question, because elsewhere it is found, John 20:23: "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them"; but here he says this only to Peter. It must be said that he gave it immediately to Peter; but the others receive it from Peter; therefore, lest it be believed that this was said only to Peter, he says, "Whose sins you shall forgive," etc. And for this reason the Pope, who holds the place of Saint Peter, has plenary power, but the others have it from him.”

“And they said, some say that thou art John the Baptist,.... It was the opinion of some of the Jews, that he was John the Baptist risen from the dead. This notion was spread, and prevailed in Herod's court, and he himself, at last, gave into it. Some Elias; the Tishbite, because an extraordinary person was prophesied of by Malachi, under the name of Elias; and who was to come in his power and spirit before the great day of the Lord; and it being a prevailing notion with the Jews, that Elias was to come before the Messiah; See Gill on Mat 11:14 they concluded that he was now come: and others Jeremias; this is omitted both by Mark and Luke; the reason why he is mentioned, is not because of what is said of him, in Jer 1:5 but because the Jews thought he was that prophet spoken of, in Deu 18:15 that should be raised up from among them, like unto Moses: and this is the sense of some of their writers (g): and in their very ancient writings a parallel is run between Moses and Jeremy (h). "R. Judah, the son of R. Simon, opened Deu 18:18 thus: "as thee", this is Jeremiah, who was, as he, in reproofs; you will find all that is written of the one, is written of the other; one prophesied forty years, and the other prophesied forty years; the one prophesied concerning Judah and Israel, and the other prophesied concerning Judah and Israel; against the one those of his own tribe stood up, and against the other those of his own tribe stood up; the one was cast into a river, and the other into a dungeon; the one was delivered by means of an handmaid, and the other by the means of a servant; the one came with words of reproof, and the other came with words of reproof.'' Now they fancied, either that the soul of Jeremy was transmigrated into another body, or that he was risen from the dead. Or one of the prophets; one of the ancient ones, as Hosea, or Isaiah, or some other: they could not fix upon the particular person who they thought was risen from the dead, and did these wondrous works among them. From the whole it appears, that these persons, whose different sentiments of Christ are here delivered, were not his sworn enemies, as the Scribes and Pharisees, who could never speak respectfully of him; saying, that he was a gluttonous man, a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners, a very wicked man, and far from being one, or like one of the prophets: they sometimes represent him as beside himself, and mad, yea, as being a Samaritan, and having a devil, as familiar with the devil, and doing his miracles by his assistance; but these were the common people, the multitude that followed Christ from place to place, and had a great opinion of him on account of his ministry, and miracles: wherefore, though they could not agree in their notions concerning him, yet each of them fix upon some person of note and worth, whom they took him for; they all looked upon him as a great and good man, and as a prophet, as John the Baptist was accounted by all the people, and as one of the chief of the prophets, as Elias and Jeremiah; and they that could not fix on any particular person, yet put him into the class of the prophets: but still they came short of the true knowledge of him; they did not know him to be a divine person, which his works and miracles proved him to be: nor to be that prophet Moses had spoken of, who was alone to be hearkened unto, though his ministry was a demonstration of it: nor that he was the Messiah, so much spoken of in prophecy, and so long expected by the Jewish nation, though he had all the characters of the Messiah meeting in him. The chief reason why they could not entertain such a thought of him, seems to be the mean figure he made in the world, being of a low extract, in strait circumstances of life, regarded only by the poorer sort; and there appearing nothing in him promising, that he should deliver them from the Roman yoke, and set up a temporal kingdom, which should be prosperous and flourishing, which was the notion of the Messiah that then generally obtained: and since they could not, by any means, allow of this character as belonging to Jesus, though otherwise they had an high opinion of him; hence they could not agree about him, but formed different sentiments of him; which is usually the case in everything, where the truth is not hit upon and received. (g) Baal Hatturim in Deut. xviii. 15. R. Abraham Seba; Tzeror Hammor, fol. 127. 4. & 143. 4. (h) Pesikta Rabbati apud R. Abarbinel, Praefat. ad Jer. fol. 96. 2.”

“Some say, &c. Herod thought that Christ was the Baptist, on account of his prodigies. (Matthew xiv. 2.) Others that he was Elias: 1st. because they expected he was about to return to them, according to the prophecy of Malachias; behold I will send you Elias; 2nd. on account of the greatness of his miracles; 3rd. on account of his invincible zeal and courage in the cause of truth and justice. Others again said he was Jeremias, either on account of his great sanctity, for he was sanctified in his mother’s womb; or, on account of his great charity and love for his brethren, as it was written of Jeremias: he is a lover of his brethren. Or, again, one of the prophets, viz. Isaias, or some other noted for eloquence; for it was the opinion of many of the Jews, as we read in St. Luke, that one of the ancient prophets had arisen again. (Denis the Carthusian)”

“And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist--risen from the dead. So that Herod Antipas was not singular in his surmise (Mat 14:1-2). some, Elias--(Compare Mar 6:15). and others, Jeremias--Was this theory suggested by a supposed resemblance between the "Man of Sorrows" and "the weeping prophet?" or one of the prophets--or, as Luke (Luk 9:8) expresses it, "that one of the old prophets is risen again." In another report of the popular opinions which Mark (Mar 6:15) gives us, it is thus expressed, "That it is a prophet [or], as one of the prophets": in other words, That He was a prophetical person, resembling those of old.”