So far the prophet has predicted the future kingdom of Christ and what fruit the gospel to be spread in the world by the apostles would bring, namely that the Gentiles should be converted to the faith. But it was known and all the prophets were well aware that the external kingdom of the Jews would finally end. When Christ came, it would have to give way to the new King Christ, so that he could establish his new kingdom, in which he would rule from sea to sea and to the ends of the earth. But because there was an insurmountable stubbornness in the people of the Jews, they did not want to give way to their new king, therefore they were forced to give way, and both the kingdom and the priesthood were devastated, and they themselves were pushed out in the most miserable way and excluded from the kingdom of Christ, since hardly a few remnants have been preserved.
The prophet will do the same in this chapter, but with extraordinarily dark and complicated words, because besides the fact that the prophet in this chapter is already dark enough in itself, the various explanations of the interpreters still increase this darkness. And when we have wriggled out of this chapter, I believe that we have overcome everything that is hidden and difficult to explain in this prophet.
V. 1. Open your door, Lebanon.
Here he calls the temple in Jerusalem "Lebanon". This people had, as far as external things were concerned, nothing more sublime and holy than this temple. He calls it "Lebanon" because it was built of the cedars of Lebanon, as is clear from Ezra. By interchanging the words (per ìåôïõõìÀáõ) he calls
he the temple Lebanon to obscure the prophecy of the desolation of the temple by the Romans. This figure of speech or metaphor is also agreeable to the Latins. For he calls the temple "Lebanon," indicating that much material from Lebanon was found in the tem
pel, and that the largest part of the temple consisted of the wood of Lebanon, as we could say the same of the Harz Mountains etc. But he speaks in the form of a command, and yet he indicates that it is still future. As if he wanted to say: The temple, which is now built and preserved and protected, will finally, when Christ comes, be opened, abandoned and desolated, the entrance will be open to the Roman enemies; no power will be sufficient to keep the enemies from breaking through.
That the fire may consume your cedars.
That is, with fire your buildings will be devastated.
V. 2.1 ) Hay, ye firs, for the cedars
have fallen.
For the sake of the people he addresses lifeless things. Because he indicates the mourning of the people, because of the desolation of the temple.
And the magnificent building is destroyed.
That is, the glorious and most precious ornaments of the temple. For there was a glorious adornment of the temple, which I also reminded above, and the most delicious gifts of votive offerings, so that even the disciples of Christ were amazed at the building of the temple. The passage in the Gospel story [Marc. 13, 1.] is well known.
Hail, O oaks of Basan.
"Bashan" is the land of the king at Og, beyond the Jordan. Afterwards it was called Gilead and Manasseh. This place in the land of Canaan is excellent and full of oaks, which is clear from Isaiah [Cap. 2, 13.]: "The day of the Lord of hosts will pass over all the oaks in Bashan." And to these oaks the prophet also speaks here, which had been taken away from there to be used for the bari of the temple.
1) This verse number is missing in Weimar's.
2) In our template only: Dominns instead of: äies Domini exereitnnm.
Because the solid forest is knocked down.
Again he describes the desolation of the temple. He calls about the temple "a solid forest", as he called it Lebanon above with regard to the various buildings, to the splendor of the beams and the columns of the temple.
V. 3: The shepherds are heard howling.
This is a Hebrew way of speaking. But the opinion is: When the temple will be destroyed and also the city will be devastated, then the howling of the shepherds will be heard, that is, the rulers and scribes who have the rule in their hands, because both the kingdom and the priesthood will perish, and all the splendor of the temple and the city will perish by fire.
Hear the lions roar.
The Hebrews call the rich and powerful by the name: young lions, which also appears from the Psalm [Ps. 34, 11.], where we read: "The rich must live in want and hunger"; in the Hebrew it is written: The young lions etc.
For the splendor of the Jordan is destroyed.
The Hebrew word actually denotes the sublimity, as in the song of Moses [2 Mos. 15, 1.]: "The Lord has done a glorious deed", that is, he has shown himself to be exceedingly glorious, he is exalted above all, "he goes up high". So it indicates glory or exaltation here also. "Jordan," however, he calls the people, since in this land the Jordan River is the most distinguished and the king before the others. For the Hebrew language has a way of naming, after an eminent mountain and a more eminent river, the people or the land in which either this river flows or the mountain is, as in the Psalm [Ps. 42:7.], "I remember thee in the land of Jordan and Hermonim, in the little mountain." Such images are quite pleasant and understandable to the Jews, however dark they may be to us. The summa of this passage is: It will destroy and annihilate the glory of this kingdom, which is at Jordan.
V. 4. Thus says the Lord my God: Shepherd the sheep of the slaughter.
After describing the disturbance of the kingdom, he now continues in a new sermon and describes their guilt by which they have earned this disturbance. However, this chapter is difficult and even dark, which I also reminded in the beginning, and I struggled a lot to get the right opinion. Lyra refers it to continuous history, which I do not approve of; for in explaining the prophets, we must be absolutely careful not to make historians out of them, unless there is a clear reason and necessity that compels us to do so. Therefore this is my opinion: He throws the whole blame of the disturbance on the godless teachers and scribes, who misused the office of the word in the most shameful way to serve their lusts, their indulgence and their avarice. For avarice reigned among the Pharisees when Christ came as the right shepherd and king. That is why they scorned and despised Christ when he taught, but served their own interests. Therefore, this whole chapter must be referred to the time of Christ and the apostles, and it must not be twisted elsewhere. Because if you understand it differently, everything does not fit.
Now here is the commandment of the Father, by which Christ is commanded to administer his ministry bravely, that he preach the word, as if he wanted to say: Christ, preach among this wretched people, among whom nothing else prevails but slaughter, that is, error and destruction of souls, because he speaks of spiritual slaughter, which happens through the godless teaching of the godless teachers. This is quite clear from what follows, and this is also clearly indicated by the evangelist Matthew, when he describes how Christ went about Galilee and lamented to him of the people, because they went astray without shepherds etc.
V. 5. 1) For their masters slay them (Quae qui possederant).
He calls them "owners" to indicate the tyranny of the chief priests and scribes, that they rage according to their will against
1) This verse number is missing in Weimar's.
corrupt the subjects and both the souls and the bodies and goods, no differently than if they were commanded to rule and were not rather servants.
And holding for no sin.
That is, surely they spoil the souls, also fear nothing for themselves. There is a very similar passage Ezek. 34, 2. ff.
Sell them.
This is what Ezekiel says [Cap. 13, 18. f.]: "When you have captured the souls among my people, you promise them life, and desecrate me among my people for a handful of barley and morsels of bread, so that you condemn the souls to death" etc. That is, for the sake of their belly, they deliver the souls into the pit of hell.
And say: Praise be to the Lord, I am now rich.
The prophet indicates a common word, which the godless teachers have used, because they think that they are also gods pleasant 1), and because of their righteousness the riches and honors flow to them, and so they cover their godlessness with the name of God. Also Isaiah attacks the avarice of the false teachers [Cap. 5, 8.]: "Woe to those who draw one house upon another, and bring one field to the ground, until there is no room left."
And their shepherds do not spare them.
That is, moved by no emotion of compassion, they only flay. They spoil both the souls and the possessions of their subjects, so insatiable greed has taken hold of them that there is no measure of robbery. The belly is so insatiable, as Solomon says [Proverbs 13:25]. We see this also in our popes and bishops, how they have amassed riches etc.
V. 6. Therefore I will not spare any more.
Here he now starts the threat by which he explains the preceding, in which he
1) It seems to us that instead of Zrati should be read: Drakos.
The destruction was foretold, as if he wanted to say: The ungodliness of the teaching causes me to proceed with punishments against the people, to finally also destroy them, because they despised me and preferred to listen to the deceivers.
And, behold, I will leave the people every one in the hand of another.
From Josephus all this is clear, and this interpretation of ours is confirmed by the histories which are in Josephus. But he writes that when the Sadducees and Pharisees ruled, everything was in the greatest confusion, nothing was safe and quiet; there was murder and constant turmoil among the Jewish people. For in addition to the fact that this land was exceedingly afflicted with internal troubles, the Roman Empire also broke in, by which the Jews were often miserably punished. And in all this there was a prelude to the last disturbance, which was more wretched and terrifying than any other could equal it. And to these disturbances he alludes here, since he says: "And in the hand of his king," that is, whom they serve, whether it be the king of Syria or the ruler of the Romans etc.
That they break up the country.
Namely, through these internal ills and the attack of the enemies etc.
V. 7. And I tended the sheep for the slaughter.
I believe that this is Christ's answer to the previous command he received to feed the sheep. And if it be so, it is connected with the preceding, "Thus said the Lord, Shepherd the sheep of the slaughter." "But I tended" etc. That is, as I was commanded of the Father, so I preached, and this I did "for the sake of the miserable sheep," that is, for the sake of the brokenhearted and oppressed among the people, for the weak, lowly, and rejected I will preserve for myself, after the fat and hopeful in Israel are slain. To the proof that this is the context of the text, also serves what follows [v. 13]: "Throw it down that it may be
be given to the potter. And I cast them into the Hans of the Lord, that they might be given to the potter. 1)
And I took unto me two staves.
He describes how he administered the teaching office, which was given to him by the Father. But the Hebrew word, which our [Latin] interpreter has translated by virga, actually means a staff, namely such a staff, which the shepherds use to tend the sheep. For here it indicates the wife of a shepherd who feeds his flock. I would rather that the Hebrew words had remained, both meaning a staff, and that they had not been translated. The first staff he calls Noam, the other Choblim [XXXX] There is no doubt that Noam means something lovely, in German: "Lust". But what it is, I do not understand yet. I am uncertain what it actually means; some translate it by rope, others by all-leader, others by skipper. Everyone may assume what he likes. I, if I may follow my thoughts, think that it designates those who feel pain, so that he wants to be understood as different kinds of sticks, the first as a sweet one, which does not hurt the sheep, does not scatter them, but only gathers them and brings them together to pasture; the other as a hard one, with which he can protect the sheep and keep the wolves away, as if he wanted to indicate a club. But because we cannot put anything certain here, we do not want to depart from the interpretation of the Septuagint and Jerome, who have translated by "rope," so that we understand by the first stick "a fine little stick," a lovely and soft twig, but by the outer one a stick that is to serve as a scourge, or the scourge itself. And this is what concerns the grammar; we will add the opinion later.
V. 8. And I destroyed three shepherds in one month.
Now he describes the one who administers the Magisterium as if to say: With an even
1) In unbelievable thoughtlessness, this entire citation is incorporated into the following keyword in both the Erlangen and the Weimar editions.
I began my teaching ministry with a happy start, since I eradicated three shepherds in one month, that is, in an extremely short time. Here all interpreters have struggled extraordinarily what he wanted to be indicated by the three shepherds. I remain absolutely in the simple context: The Jewish people was governed by three kinds of superiors, namely the elders, priests and prophets. The elders are the kings, princes and judges who have the regiment in their hands, who preside over the administration of the sword. The priests ruled by the word, they administered the teaching office. The prophets had [divine] inspirations. The prophets were followed by the scribes, who are called teachers of the law (νομοδιδάσκαλοί). But the Pharisees and the Sadducaeans did not administer a proper (legitima) office of government, but were sects. I think that the prophet is alluding to these three classes, as if he wanted to say: By my preaching I have put an end to the Jewish kingdom, I have destroyed it spiritually, namely by the word, which happened from the baptism of John, when Christ received the teaching office according to the revelation that came from heaven etc.
Because I did not like theirs.
[Et abbreviata est anima mea] is a Hebrew way of speaking. But it means: to suffer something with impatience, to be peevish, as we also say in German almost with the same manner of speaking: "He is short-tempered," that is, he is impatient, he easily takes something ill. Therefore, the opinion is: I hate this people, I cannot but reject and scatter them, but I want to preserve few. Again, their soul also had a disgust for me, satiety and hatred against me has caught them. "I do not want them, so they do not want me again." Therefore I said:
V. 9. I will not watch over you; that which dies, die; that which languishes, languish.
Here the prophet [in Hebrew] used words in the feminine, therefore, I believe, to indicate the misfortune that the people suffer, since these godless masters are in the regiment, namely, that they lack a head and a man and a right shepherd, who is
Christ. Therefore the opinion is: Because you despise me, I despise you again; I do not care whether you perish or are saved. He who dies, let him die; he who is destroyed, let him be destroyed; I will not protect, I will not restore, I will not save. I will leave you sunk in the ephah (above Cap. 5, 8.), so that you cannot come out. And this judgment of God is felt by the Jews enough and more than enough today, since they, entangled in their errors, cannot wriggle out of it, so that they would repent and become blessed; they cannot come to the knowledge of the truth. For he speaks here of spiritual death and destruction, by which they are cut off from the fellowship of the blessed, and go astray no differently than if there were no God to take care of these matters of men. Thus, out of His judgment, the dear God also caused the whole world to go astray before He restored to us His gospel, through which we, snatched from Satan, are transferred into the kingdom of the Son of God etc.
V. 10. And I took my staff Gently.
It is disputed among the interpreters in many ways what these two rods mean. I have also thought in many ways, but I see no better understanding than that which the text itself brings with it. For it clearly says that abscindere [baculum], or, to translate it more correctly, "to break the rod," is the same fei as "to cancel the covenant," which is well to be observed. But these two staves mean two sermons, the Gospel and the Law. The first rod is the gospel, that sweet and exceeding lovely word by which the sheep are fed and led and gathered together, that they err not, but are fed with kindness and lovingkindness. The other rod is the law, which is preached to the hard and stiff-necked works saints, that they may be terrified, threatening them with death and hell. So Christ also used both staffs, but he mainly used the first one, namely the gospel, because he came to preach the gospel to the poor, the broken and afflicted spirits, and the poor who were in need.
He healed those who were weighed down by the burden of the law. But against the stiff-necked, severe severity was needed. But he says that he broke the first staff, that is, he took away the sweet gospel and the light from the Jews, so that this breaking refers more to the people than to the staff, as if he wanted to say: I have cast out the largest part of the people, so that they go astray in the highest blindness, from which they shall never be brought back, but I have preserved a few remnants. It is just what Paul also says [Rom.9, 28.] "The Lord will do a tax on earth", that is, that it bears fruit with a few, many he controls, who become unbelievers, and are rejected from the fellowship of the godly 1) etc., as he adds:
V. 11. And he was lifted up that day.
Namely with this people. "My covenant", that is, the promise of the gospel. And so, to this day, the gospel has been taken from them.
And the wretched sheep who were waiting for me realized that it was the word of the Lord.
"The miserable sheep", that is, the very small part of the broken staff that is still left in my hand. These very few remains that have been preserved recognize the sweetness of the Gospel and what an exceedingly great treasure it is. Therefore they accept it and believe it. To all others it seems to be a word of the devil, which is evident everywhere from the history of the Gospel, where it is described how the godless Jews were most bitterly hostile to Christ, who did not want to recognize this light and salvation of the whole world. This is what this whole passage contains, that when the gospel is preached, everything that is high, glorious and wise in the world is angry. There are hardly a few who accept it, the wretched and despised by the world, but among the rest, the despisers, it is broken; not as if the holy gospel were broken, which is always a power of God, but according to the we-
1) Weimarsche: priorurn;. Erlanger: piorurn. We have adopted the latter reading.
The condemnation it produces in the hearts of the despisers, just as Paul makes the Antichrist sit above God etc.
V. 12 If it pleases you, bring how much I am worth.
[Si bonum est in oculis vestris,] that is, "Do you like it." For this Hebrew way of speaking is frequent in Scripture, as, in the first book of Moses [Cap. 1, 31/: "And God looked at all that He had made, and behold, it was very good," that is, it pleased Him. Here the prophet inserts a remarkable passage in which he deals with the reason why the staff of which he had just spoken was broken, and he describes the godless Jews who despised Christ and treated Him in the most unworthy manner. For they held him in such contempt that they preferred even the murderer Barrabas to him, and then bought him for thirty pieces of silver, which is clear from the history of the Gospel. This is the contempt that the prophet draws on them, as if to say, "You would have rightly esteemed Christ, the true King and your Savior, but you despised him, bought him, considered him nothing, and therefore he rightly rejected you.
"Do you like it", that is, do you want to buy me or do you not? Since all this is perfectly consistent with the Gospel story of Christ being sold, let us not seek another, more remote interpretation. But he leaves it up to them to buy or not to buy. He says that it is up to them, not that God commands them to buy, but that he punishes the carelessness of their hearts, because they held Christ so low that they even discussed whether they should pay the price of thirty pieces of silver for him to Judas or not. And so he imitated their deliberation in which they discussed the selling price.
V. 13. Throw it, that it may be given to the potter.
The evangelist Matthew [Cap., 27, 10/ translates [instead of ad statuarium in the Vulgate]: "to the potter", and quite correctly. Because the Hebrew word means a potter, which is
is quite clear from many passages of Scripture. Ps. 2:9 [Vulg/: "Like a potter's vessel you shall break them." Likewise in the 103rd Psalm, 1) [v. 14/: "He knoweth what manner of vessel (figmentum) we are." Likewise in Sirach 2) [Cap. 33, 13/: "Like clay in the potter's hand" etc. Because the Jews cannot resolve this passage, which is so clearly against them, they translate it differently. Some also translate: God's box [thesaurarium = treasure house].
Ei, an excellent summa!
Decorum pretium or a glorious prize. It is irony, as if he wanted to say: This is certainly my excellent people, which I have esteemed so great, which I have brought back from Egypt with such great miracles and such great power, which I have chosen before all the peoples of the earth; see, how they despise me, what thanks they give me for my exceedingly rich goods, for my miracles, services and sermons, "is it not a beautiful money", for which they buy me? Their leader and chief is Judas, who sells me. But what shall I do? they despise me, they sell and buy me, they appoint me innocent to death; I certainly deserve that, I will truly suffer to be sold and bought, I will suffer to be led to death as a sheep does, I will not resist.
And I took the thirty pieces of silver.
This is exactly in accordance with the passage in Matthew [Cap. 27, 3. ff/, which writes that Judas, when the betrayal had soured him, was smitten by his conscience over the sin he had committed, and hurried back to the scribes and Pharisees, and threw the purchase price at their feet in the temple, and relieved his suffering with a rope; after that the money came to the potter, namely for the purchased field etc. Here the sacred writers struggle, and Jerome raises the question why the evangelist Matthew quoted this testimony as if it were from Jeremiah, while nowhere in Jeremiah does it say that the money came to the potters.
1) In our prelims: in Isaiah.
2) In our template: npuü Hiererniarn.
but in this prophet Zechariah. I have to answer this recently: The evangelists are not used to quote the testimonies of the prophets literally, but only to give their opinion, which also Matthew does in the passage that is written in the ninth chapter, v. 9, where the prophet said: "Daughter of Zion, rejoice greatly, and daughter of Jerusalem, exult" etc. Matthew adduces it thus [Cap. 21, 5.]: as it is written, "Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee," etc. where the words are quite different, yet nothing is changed in the mind. Then Matthew [Cap. 27, 9.] also added this: "Of the children of Israel," which is not in the prophet, namely, that he might explain the selling and the buying, remembering that it was done of the children of Israel. Then, to the fact that he quotes it as if it were from Jeremiah, I have nothing else to answer than this well-known word, that the prophet may have had two names, or that he may have quoted in general according to the manner that the other evangelists also have, unconcerned about the name of the prophet. Augustine treats this subject carefully, see after. I would not easily believe that the books of the prophets were confused by changing the titles. Then, in Matthew's case, there were undoubtedly holy and learned people, full of the Holy Spirit, who reminded him that this passage of Scripture he had cited was in Zechariah, not in Jeremiah. Prompted by their recollection, he could easily have corrected this minor error if it had pleased him, or if he had thought there was much in it. But there is no reason why we should anxiously agonize over these and similar concerns, since in these things does not lie the main and epitome of our faith. Those are exceedingly nonsensical who labor in such unnecessary matters, which, nevertheless, the prophets of our time are bent upon solely by reading the Scriptures for the purpose of finding out such passages as may give rise to disputes and quarrels. In the meantime, they leave the main points of religion pending, while they should do this one thing above all, that they should teach Christianity.
stum who reigns. This is what all the apostles do unanimously, who everywhere teach the mystery of the passion and resurrection of Christ, as if they had forgotten all the other miracles and deeds of Christ etc.
V. 14. And I broke my other staff Woe.
This staff is the administration of the law, as I have also interpreted above. But he says that this last staff is broken, that is, in addition, that the gospel is taken away from them, this lovely and exceedingly sweet preaching, the law is also taken away for them, namely in such a way that they no longer have the law, from which they could establish the priesthood, kingdom, ceremonies and sacrifices, but all this ceases after the law is taken away from them, that is, they can no longer keep the law, they lack the city, the temple, the priesthood, therefore they cannot perform sacrifices; Nowadays they carry around only the Bible and their more than ridiculous dreams. This must not be taken from the spiritual abdication of the law, as it is abdicated for all the godly, that it no longer has the right to accuse and condemn, but it indicates: neither in the letter nor in the spirit is it abdicated for them, that is, they have no use of the law.
That I may raise up the brotherhood between Judah and Israel.
That is, between the right Jews and those who are so according to the letter (litera- les). Those of the children of Abraham who have believed are called "Judah"; those who have not believed, "Israel". For in this prophet these words must be taken spiritually, as also the apostle Paul interprets [Rom. 2, 28. f.], so that by the name "Judah" are signified the faithful etc. For nowadays Jerusalem is all over the earth, wherever there are believers, which is clear from the 87th Psalm, v. 4: "Behold, the Philistines and the Tyres together with the Moors are born there." This struggle between the true Jews and those who are (literal) Jews in name never ceases.
are. Even today, the law is still the subject of heated debate, as we see in the epistle to the Romans. But because the Jews stubbornly defend their righteousness, they do not attain righteousness.
V. 15: Take unto thee the tools of a foolish shepherd.
This whole passage is drawn by the holy writers with great agreement to the Antichrist, and especially Lyra, whose books, as I believe, deal well to the third part with the Antichrist. I do not understand them differently than that here a sign is given to the preceding prophecy, in order to confirm it. For so it happens in all prophets that signs are added to the sermons, which we have abundantly reminded above. Thus Jeremiah carried a wooden yoke [Cap. 27, 2.], thus Isaiah went naked [Cap. 20, 2.] etc. Thus a sign is here added to the preceding sermon of the rejection and ruin of the people. But the prophet is commanded to take with him the tools of a shepherd, that is, tools such as a shepherd uses: a hat, a sackcloth, a mantle, a staff, and also the flute. But "a foolish shepherd," that is, one who in all things resembles a shepherd in outward appearance (habitu), but in fact does nothing less than what befits a shepherd.
V. 16 For behold, I will raise up shepherds in the land.
The prophet interprets the sign. But it is the singular [pastorem] for the plural, as if to say, They bought and sold me, who was the right shepherd and savior; they sold me for thirty pieces of silver. "I came in my Father's name and they did not accept me. Another shall come in his name, and they shall receive him" [John 5:43], and that to their great hurt, for he shall be a ruin to their souls and to their goods. For that which is scattered shall not be gathered together, neither shall that which is broken be healed etc. What this is, is abundantly treated by me in a
Sermon 1) on a similar passage of Ezekiel. In sum, however, it is this: A right shepherd must be watchful, diligent in word, he must take account of consciences, that he may comfort the sorrowful, strengthen the afflicted so that they do not despair, bring back those who have turned away, in short, that he may win many to Christ. But a foolish shepherd, he says, does none of these things, because they no longer have the word. It is taken from them, both staves are broken. But if the word is not there, then all preaching is in vain; indeed, it is exceedingly harmful and destructive to souls, like the most effective poison, as he soon adds:
They will tear their claws.
This is a beautiful passage and worthy of attention; that is, they will make them unfit. Thus the false teachers are constantly told in the Scriptures that they corrupt both bodies and souls. But to the claws is ascribed the power of preaching, as appears from Micah [Cap.4, 13.]: "I will give thee claws of iron." Since the prophet says here that those foolish shepherds will tear the claws of all, he indicates the misfortune that results from ungodly teaching: that the sheep are hurt and afflicted and prevented from going to pasture, that the consciences cannot come to the knowledge of the truth. But to this day, the ungodly teachers of the Jews resist the wretched in such a way that they cannot come out of error, and are even more entangled and immersed in error from day to day.
V. 17. O idolaters!
That is, you represent a shepherd in outward appearance, but without any service, not unlike how a painted idol represents someone's person.
Who let the herd.
This is read [instead of derelinquens in the Vulgate] in Hebrew plainly so in the plural.
1) The sermon on the Sunday Misericordias Domini is meant. Walch, St. Louis edition, vol. XI, 782, 8 10 ff. Luther also refers to this. Col. 1947.
That is, though you are lumps and idols, adorned with the garb of shepherds, yet in truth you are far from being shepherds. For you do not feed the sheep, you only fatten yourselves with the milk and the yield of the sheep.
The sword comes down on her arm and on her right eye.
That is, there is no power in them, which is signified by the right arm, no knowledge and no light of truth, which he understands by the right eye. For "the sword comes upon them," that is, the wrath of God and the judgment by which they are punished and weakened and made strong, so that they are unable to do anything. That is, they are without the light of truth, overwhelmed with darkness and error in every way, in which they lie buried and enclosed, as it were, so that they cannot even breathe after the truth. Therefore they can do nothing right, nothing good. They have one arm, but a left one, that is, they labor and are even concerned in the righteousness of the works of the flesh, but they are not the right works, they are without light and truth, they are foreboding faith, therefore they are all only sins. Then
they also have a left eye, that is, they are quite perceptive in the prudence of the flesh and of this world, so that in this respect they also surpass the children of light, as Christ says [Luc. 16, 8.], but left is everything, everything they hold is carnal. This cleverness is death and enmity against God, as the apostle says in the letter to the Romans [Cap. 8, 6. 7.]. Such a sword is over all who are cut off from grace, that they can do nothing, know nothing, or understand nothing. Others understand this passage simply of the downfall of false teachers; but the former view is more appropriate and fills me, namely, that the ungodly is the punishment for himself, as St. Augustine says. For as soon as the ungodly has departed from godliness, he has his punishment; there is nothing lacking in it but that it is not yet revealed. Therefore, this whole passage can be very appropriately drawn to the Roman pope and the bishops of our lines, who, except for the outward appearance and insignia of bishops, do nothing that befits a bishop. They are clogs and idols, born only to the ruin of souls, while they also lack the right eye and the right arm, that they teach nothing wholesome, but only the ruin of souls etc.