Tuesday, May 19, 2026

John Maldonatus (1533-1583) on Matthew 17:11 and the Then-Future Coming of Old Testament Elijah

  

Verse 11. Elias is come

 

The present is here put, in the usual manner, for the future or indefinite, with a word signifying obligation, as Elias ought to come, or should come (so infra, verse 23, and S. John 21:23). “Should not die;” that is, would not die, or ought not to die. Christ says that Elias will come. The followers of Calvin say that what He said about the future coming of Elias is to be referred to S. John the Baptist, as Christ, indeed, seems to explain in the verse following. But Christ does not say that Elias has come already, but that he will come; for His words in the verse following are spoken not of Elias, who He here says shall come, but of S. John the Baptist, who had come in the spirit and power of Elias.

 

From the fact that He speaks of S. John in the past tense, and of Elias in the future (or He speaks of an appointed time in the present put for the future), they ought to have concluded that He intended to teach that, besides John, who had already come in the spirit of Elias, the very true Elias himself would come hereafter: as also from the words, “he will restore all things,” which John did not do. Their gloss on John’s having restored all things, because he preached Christ, who restored all things, is nothing to the purpose. For in this case all who have preached Christ have restored all things. But it is clear that Christ opposed Elias to all others, as if he alone, after Himself, should restore all things. The words appear to be a kind of paraphrase of Malachi 4:6; or it may be that Elias is said to be about to restore all things, partly because he did restore many per se; partly, and much more, because he was to be the sign of the restitution of all things, that is, of the consummation of the world, which could not be in the case of John. The testimony of Malachi, too, is clear (4:5). It is evident that the Prophet is speaking of the great and terrible day of judgment, before which the promised Elias was to come. This, therefore, is to be understood not of John, but of the true Elias. Again, the author of Ecclesiasticus (48:10), speaking of Elias, and alluding to the testimony of Malachi, says: “Who are registered in the judgments of time to appease the wrath of the Lord, to reconcile the heart of the father to the son, and to restore the tribes of Jacob”. But they say that this is not a canonical book. Granting that it be so, yet a very ancient tradition is certainly contained in it, which Christ confirmed in the same words, that the true Elias would restore all things. Again, S. John in the Apocalypse (11:3–6) writes so clearly that Moses and Elias would come, that it cannot be denied with any sense or modesty. “And I will give unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth. These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks that stand before the Lord of the earth. And if any man will hurt them, fire shall come out of their mouths, and shall devour their enemies; and if any man will hurt them, in this manner must he be slain. These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy; and they have power over waters to turn them into blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues as often as they will.”

 

Who these were he immediately describes. “These have power to shut heaven.” Who does not see that this is Elias? And, “they have power over waters”. Who does not see that Moses is pointed out as by the finger? This was the reason why Moses and Elias, rather than any other of the Prophets, should be present at the Transfiguration. 1. Christ pleased to show His future coming visibly to these three Apostles. 2. Because, in His second advent, Moses and Elias were to be sent before to prepare His way, as John had done at His first coming. Lastly, this was the opinion of all the Ancients; of Elias it was most constant, and without any dissentient voice; of Moses it was less constant, for some thought that he, and others Enoch, would be the witness of the second advent of the Lord.

 

The followers of Calvin object that in the following (twelfth) verse Christ says: “I say unto you that Elias is already come”; and (verse 13): “Then the disciples understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist, and that John came in the spirit and power of Elias, as the angel testified” (S. Luke 1:17). But we maintain that Christ did not, therefore, deny, but rather, in plain terms, confirmed the fact that Elias also would come before His second advent.

 

But when Christ said, “Elias has come already,” He wished only to signify that which pertains to the result, that is, to the sign of the first advent, and to the preaching of repentance (both of which Elias was to do in the second coming), to show that he had come already, because in the first coming John had done both. For Malachi said of the second coming: “Behold I will send you Elias” (4:5), as of the first coming he had said of S. John the Baptist: “Behold I send my angel, and he shall prepare the way before my face” (3:1).

 

Christ, therefore, desired to say that this was not the cause of the unbelief of the Jews, but their perverseness and obstinacy. For the Elias who had been promised before His first coming, that is, John, had come as Christ had declared (supra, 11:14). (John Maldonatus, A Commentary on the Holy Gospels, 2 vols. [2d ed.; trans. George J. Davie; Catholic Standard Library; London: John Hodges, 1888], 2:72-75)

 

Examples of Patristic and Medieval Commentaries on Jeremiah 13:23

  

13:23 Can the Leopard Change Its Spots?

 

 

The Change in the Ethiopian Eunuch. Bede: Also, he showed so much love in his religion that, leaving behind a queen’s court, he came from the farthest regions of the world to the Lord’s temple. Hence, as a just reward, while he sought the interpretation of something that he was reading, he found Christ, whom he was seeking. Furthermore, as Jerome says, he found the church’s font there in the desert, rather than in the golden temple of the synagogue. For there in the desert something happened that Jeremiah declared was to be wondered at, an Ethiopian changed his skin, that is, with the stain of his sins washed away by the waters of baptism, he went up, shining white, to Jesus. Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 8:27a.

 

The Prophetic Word Can Lead to Faith. Jerome: By the reading of the prophet the eunuch of Candace, the queen of Ethiopia, is made ready for the baptism of Christ. Though it is against nature, the Ethiopian does change his skin, and the leopard his spots. Letter 69.6.

 

The Fountain of the Gospel. Jerome: Then immediately quickening her pace, she began to move along the old road that leads to Gaza, that is, to the “power” or “wealth” of God, silently meditating on that type of the Gentiles, the Ethiopian eunuch, who, in spite of the prophet, changed his skin and, while he read the Old Testament, found the fountain of the gospel. Letter 108.11.

 

The Irreligious Cannot Easily Change. Athanasius: For as the prophet speaks,” If the Ethiopian changes his skin, or the leopard his spots,” then will they be willing to think religiously who have been instructed in irreligion. You, however, beloved, on receiving this, read it by yourself. If you approve of it, read it also to the brethren who happen to be present, that they, too, on hearing it, may welcome the council’s zeal for the truth and the exactness of its sense and may condemn that of Christ’s foes, the Arians, and the futile pretenses, which for the sake of their irreligious heresy they have been at the pains to frame among themselves. Defense of the Nicene Definition 7.32.

 

Some Refuse to Practice Virtue. Chrysostom: Moreover, what did the prophet say? “If the Ethiopian changes his skin and the leopard its spots, this people will be able to do well, when it has learned evil.” He did not mean that it was impossible for them to practice virtue, but that they did not wish to do so; therefore, they could not. Homilies on the Gospel of John 68. (Jeremiah, Lamentations, ed. Dean O. Wenthe [Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2009], 110-11)

 

Jerome on Jeremiah 13:23

  

13:23: “If the Ethiopian can change his skin or the panther his variations, then also you can do good even though you learned evil.”

 

This testimony is used against the church by those who assert that people have diverse natures and that the blackness or variation of sinners is so great that they are incapable of crossing over to the brightness and beauty of a single color; but those who assert this are not paying attention to what follows: “You can do good even though you learned evil.” For whatever can be learned does not come from nature but from effort and the will of the individual, although a sinful will can, to some extent, be changed into a sinful nature by the regular practice and excessive love of sinning. But what is impossible for people is possible for God: even if the Ethiopian and the panther appear unable to change their nature, he who works in the Ethiopian and the panther is able to do so, as the apostle says: “I can do all things in Christ who strengthens me.” Also in another passage he says, “I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I but the grace of God that is in me.” And he also says, “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.” And again, we read that it is written: “What have you that you did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?” For these reasons, let not the wise person glory in his wisdom or the mighty man in his might, or the rich person in his riches, or the chaste person in his chastity, since he knows that in all these things the virtue comes from Christ, not from those who would boast in their virtues. (Jerome, Commentary on Jeremiah [trans. Michael Graves; Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2011], 86-87)

 

Robert Alter on Jeremiah 13:23

  

Can a Nubian change his skin, / a leopard its spots? This formulation— in traditional translations, kushi is rendered as “Ethiopian”—expresses a profound moral pessimism: just as these bodily features are ineradicable, your propensity for evil will never change, and so a national catastrophe is inevitable. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 2:906)

 

Robert Alter on Jeremiah 12:5

  

flee. The received text has boteaḥ, “trust,” which does not work in the a fortiori relation of the first verset to the second. An old exegetical tradition, going back to the Aramaic Targum and several medieval commentaries and picked up by some modern scholars, understands the verb to mean “fall,” which makes the meaning neat but for which there is slim philological evidence. This translation adopts a proposed emendation, reading boreaḥ, “flee,” instead of boteaḥ (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 2:901-2)

 

Robert Alter on Jeremiah 11:14

  

in the time of their evil. The Masoretic Text reads “for [beʿad] their evil,” but several Hebrew manuscripts a well as four ancient versions read “in the time of [beʿet]”. The scribal error was probably triggered by the use of beʿad earlier in the verse (“do not pray for this people”). “Evil” in this phrase suggests “disaster” but is worth retaining as “evil” because of the pointed reiteration of the term as the prophecy continues. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 2:899)

 

Robert Alter on Jeremiah 9:18

  

they have flung us from our dwellings. The translation emends the Masoretic Text, which reads, literally, “they have flung our dwellings,” hishlikhu mishkenoteinu, to hishilikhunu mimishekenoteinu. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 2:892)

 

Blog Archive