Mark 3:23-30

Ver 23. And He called them unto Him, and said unto them in parables, "How can Satan cast out Satan? 24. And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25. And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26. And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. 27. No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house. 28. Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: 29. But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:" 30. Because they said, "He hath an unclean spirit."

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: The blasphemy of the Scribes having been detailed, our Lord shews that what they said was impossible, confirming His proof by an example.

Wherefore it says, "And having called them together unto Him, He said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?" As if He had said, A kingdom divided against itself by civil war must be desolated, which is exemplified both in a house and in a city. Wherefore also if Satan's kingdom by divided against itself, so that Satan expels Satan from men, the desolation of the kingdom of the devils is at hand.

But their kingdom consists in keeping men under their dominion. If therefore they are driven away from men, it amounts to nothing less [p. 66] than the dissolution of their kingdom. But if they still hold their power over men, it is manifest that the kingdom of evil is still standing, and Satan is not divided against himself.

Gloss.: And because He has already shewn by an example that a devil cannot cast out a devil, He shews how he can be expelled, saying, "No man can enter into a strong man's house, &c."

Theophylact: The meaning of the example is this: The devil is the strong man; his goods are the men into whom he is received; unless therefore a man first conquers the devil, how can he deprive him of his goods, that is, of the men whom he has possessed?

So also I who spoil his goods, that is, free men from suffering by his possession, first spoil the devils and vanquish them, and am their enemy. How then can ye say that I have Beelzebub and that being the friend of the devils, I cast them out?

Bede, in Marc., 1, 17: The Lord has also bound the strong man, that is, the devil: which means, He has restrained him from seducing the elect, and entering into his house, the world; He has spoiled his house, and his goods, that is men, because He has snatched them from the snares of the devil, and has united them to His Church.

Or, He has spoiled his house, because the four parts of the world, over which the old enemy had sway, He has distributed to the Apostles and their successors, that they may convert the people to the way of life.

But the Lord shews that they committed a great sin in crying out that which they knew to be of God, was of the devil, when He subjoins, "Verily, I say unto you, All sins are forgiven, &c." All sins and blasphemies are not indeed remitted to all men, but to those who have gone through a repentance in this life sufficient for their sins; thus neither is Novatus right [ed. note: Novatus was a Carthaginian presbyter, who, after having abetted Felicissimus in his schism against St. Cyprian, came to Rome and joined Novatian against Pope Cornelius, A.D. 251. His error, which is here opposed to Origen's, consisted in denying that Christ had left with His Church the power of absolving from certain sins, especially from apostasy.], who denied that any pardon should be granted to penitents, who had lapsed in time of martyrdom; nor Origen, who asserts that after the general judgment, after the revolution of ages, all sinners will receive pardon for their sins, which error the following words of the Lord condemn, when He adds, "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, &c."

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: He says indeed, that blasphemy concerning Himself was pardonable, because He then seemed to be a man despised and of the most lowly birth, but, that contumely against God has no remission. Now blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is against God, for the operation of the Holy Ghost is the kingdom of God; and for this reason, He says, that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost cannot be remitted. Instead, however, of what is here added, "But will be in danger of eternal damnation," another Evangelist says, "Neither in this world, nor in the world to come." By which is understood, the judgment which is according to the law, and that which is to come.

For the law orders one who blasphemes God to be slain, and in the judgment of the second law he has no remission. However, he who is baptized is taken out of this world; but the Jews were ignorant of the remission which takes place in baptism. [ed. note: A few words are left out in the Catena, which occur in Victor, and which do away with the obscurity of the passage. The missing of the whole is, that though there is no remission either in this world or in the next, yet that baptism is, as it were, a space between the two worlds, where remission can be obtained. The reason, therefore, why this blasphemy could not be remitted, was, because the Jews would not come to Christ's baptism.]

He therefore who refers to the devil miracles, and the casting out of devils which belong to the Holy Ghost alone, has no room left him for remission of his blasphemy. Neither does it appear that such a blasphemy as this is remitted, since it is against the Holy Ghost. Wherefore he adds, explaining it, "Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit."

Theophylact: We must however understand, that they will not obtain pardon unless they repent. But since it was at the flesh of Christ that they were offended, even though they did not repent, some excuse was allowed them, and they obtained some remission.

Pseudo-Jerome: Or this is meant; that he will not deserve to work out repentance, so as to be accepted, who, understanding who Christ was, declared that He was the prince of the devils.

Bede: Neither however are those, who do not believe the Holy Spirit to be God, guilty of an unpardonable blasphemy, because they were persuaded to do this by human ignorance, not by devilish malice. Augustine, Serm., 71, 12, 22: Or else impenitence itself is the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which hath no remission. For either in his thought or by his tongue, he speaks a word against the Holy Ghost, the forgiver of sins, who treasures up for himself an impenitent heart.

But he subjoins, "Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit," that he might shew that His reason for saying it, was their declaring that He cast out a devil by Beelzebub, not because there is a blasphemy, which cannot be remitted, since even this might be remitted through a right repentance; but the cause why this sentence was put forth by the Lord, after mentioning the unclean spirit, (who as our Lord shews was divided against himself,) was, that the Holy Ghost even makes those whom He brings together undivided, by His remitting those sins, which divided them from Himself, which gift of remission is resisted by no one, but him who has the hardness of an impenitent heart.

For in another place, the Jews said of the Lord, that He had a devil [John 7:20], without however His saying any thing there about the blasphemy against the Spirit; and the reason is, that they did not there cast in His teeth the unclean spirit, in such a way, that spirit could by their own words be shewn to be divided against Himself, as Beelzebub was here shewn to be, by their saying, that it might be he who cast out devils. [ed. note: St. Augustine explains his meaning by going on to say, that as the Devil was proved by the words of the Jews to be the author of division, so the Holy Ghost was the author of unity, so that one form of blasphemy of the Holy Ghost was rending the unity of the Church, without which there is no remission. St. Ambrose, something in the same way, applies the text to the Arians, as dividing the Holy Trinity, de Fide, i, 1.]