Matthew 23:35Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

When questioned about the reason for their harsh punishment, one could assert that their cruelty and transgressions exceeded all others, with no prior experiences leading them to greater insight. Have you not considered the words of Lamech, "From Lamech I will avenge myself sevenfold" (Genesis 4:24), implying that he deemed himself deserving of a greater penalty than Cain? Why so? Because he did not take heed from Cain's example.

It is not that anyone should bear punishment for another's wrongdoings, but rather that, despite witnessing many sinners and their retribution, they remained unrepentant, continuing to indulge in sin, thus deserving identical consequences. Notice how Christ deftly brings to mind Abel, indicating that this assassination was also driven by jealousy. So, what defense do you have now? Or are you unaware of Cain's fate? Did God overlook his actions? Did He not subject him to profound punishment? Have you not heard of the torments your forebears faced when they maltreated the prophets? Were they not met with numerous afflictions? Why have you not improved? But why should I recount the punishments endured by your ancestors? You, who judge your forefathers, why do you act even worse than they did? You have yourselves declared that the wicked shall perish (Matthew 21:41). What excuse can you present for such blatant wrongdoing following that judgment?

But who is this Zechariah? Some consider him the father of John the Baptist, others a prophet, and some think he is another priest known also as Joddai. Note that this deed was heinous; they not only murdered the holy ones but even did so in sacred spaces. By making these statements, Christ not only instilled fear in them but also provided reassurance to His disciples, indicating that the righteous had previously endured similar sufferings. He warned them that, just as others faced penalties, so would they face severe retribution. He therefore designates His disciples as prophets, wise men, and scribes, removing any justification for the Jews. He stated, "You cannot claim that I sent from among the Gentiles, and thus you have succumbed to temptation; you have reached a point where you are murderers, thirsty for blood." Hence, He affirmed earlier, "I will send prophets and scribes." All prophets rebuked them for similar sins, declaring that they mix blood with blood and are men of bloodshed (Hosea 4:2). This is why God required blood sacrifices, emphasizing that if blood is so revered in animals, it is even more precious in humankind. Thus, He warned Noah, "I will require a reckoning for every blood that is shed" (Genesis 9:6). There exist numerous instances that illustrate God’s prohibition against killing. It is why God did not permit the consumption of anything strangled. Oh, how great is God’s mercy, who, even knowing the Jews would gain nothing, still performed His work! “I send,” He says, “even knowing they shall be killed.” Therefore, the Jews were reproached for their futile claim that they would not be complicit in their ancestors’ sins. These individuals executed prophets in the synagogues, failing to honor the sacredness of the places or the roles of those they murdered. They did not slay ordinary individuals but rather prophets and wise men, wishing to avoid accountability from them. When Christ refers to prophets, He signifies the apostles and their successors, for many have prophesied.

Then, wishing to amplify their trepidation, He declared, "Truly, truly I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation," indicating that all these judgments will fall upon you, with dire consequences forthcoming: for the one who has witnessed many sinners and yet remained unrepentant, specifically committing even greater sins, will incur a far worse punishment than they. Just as he, had he been willing, could have greatly benefited himself and improved by observing the examples of others, he, having failed to reform, deserves even greater punishment due to the numerous opportunities he had to learn from the punished sinners of the past, which yielded no benefit to himself.

According to tradition, there was a specific area in the temple reserved for the virgins. When Zechariah served as high priest, he placed the Virgin Mary among the virgins after the birth of Christ, leading to outrage among the Jews, who then killed him for this act. It is not unbelievable that the father of the Forerunner, Zechariah, had a father named Barachiah, just as the prophet Zechariah had a father also named Zechariah. It seems possible that, being from the same tribes, their names could naturally coincide.

Others suggest that this Zechariah refers to the father of John the Baptist, citing certain apocryphal writings, claiming he was killed for proclaiming the arrival of the Messiah. As this claim lacks strong support in the Holy Scriptures, it is dismissed as quickly as it is asserted. A third view holds that this refers to the Zechariah who was martyred by King Joash, as chronicled in the Kings narrative. It is important to note, however, that this Zechariah was not the son of Barachiah but rather the son of the priest Jehoiada. Thus, the Scripture states that Joash forgot the good deeds of his father Jehoiada. Although we acknowledge Zechariah and agree on the location of his death, there arises the question of why he is called the son of Barachiah instead of Jehoiada. In our language, Barachiah translates to "blessed of the Lord," while the priest Jehoiada's name means “righteous” in Hebrew. The Gospel used by the Nazarenes substitutes "son of Barachiah" with "son of Ioyad." Among us, simpler brethren point to red stones amidst the ruins of the temple and altar, or at the entrance of the gate leading to Siloam, believing they are stained with the blood of Zechariah. Yet, let us not judge their misconceptions, which stem from animosity toward the Jews and sincere faith.

They understood that full retribution awaited Cain, while Lamech would be avenged seventy times over, because they did not gain wisdom from the examples set before them. Abel is mentioned in passing, illustrating that his murder stemmed from jealousy. Regarding Zacharias, there are differing opinions; some suggest he was among the twelve prophets, others identify him as the son of Joddai or Azariah, while many assert he was the father of John the Baptist. It is said that an unwritten tradition noted a designated place within the temple for virgins, where he allowed the Virgin to stand after the Savior's birth, declaring her virginity, for which he paid the ultimate price between the temple and the altar.

This is warranted, as they committed the gravest crime of all—the slaying of the Messiah. ‘Unto the blood of Abel the righteous,’ who was wrongfully slain by his brother Cain (Gen. 4:8). ‘Unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachiah,’ etc. This likely refers to the Zacharias who, ordered by King Joash, was executed in the temple's courtyard (2 Chron. 24:20). The Lord utilizes instances of the innocently shed blood of prophets and righteous individuals from the earliest and latest sacred Jewish texts as pivotal examples. It is acknowledged that in Chronicles this Zechariah is referred to as the son of Joddai rather than Barachiah; however, this could be due to the practice among Jews to have multiple names (for instance, Matthew - Levi, Simon - Cephas, etc.). Some ancient scholars (Origen, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Theophylact) have posited that the reference is to Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist. However, it remains historically uncertain whether he was indeed the son of Barachiah; moreover, accounts of his demise, which are derived from apocryphal sources, do not align. Nevertheless, it is possible that these early fathers had valid reasons for their interpretations. The suggestion that Zacharias Barachiah, one of the twelve minor prophets (Zechariah 1:1), is the individual in question is challenging to substantiate because there is no evidence of his martyrdom in either historical or traditional accounts. Conversely, the view that this Zacharias was killed by the Zealots, as mentioned by Josephus Flavius (Bel. jud. 4, 6, 4), is entirely untenable: 1) the murder occurred long after Christ's crucifixion, around the time of the temple's destruction, while Christ speaks in the past tense—‘killed’; 2) Josephus designates this Zacharias as the son of Baruch (Βαρου'χου var. Βαρασ'χαι'ου), thus Barachiah and Baruch are distinctly different. ‘Killed between the temple and the altar’ refers to the space between the sanctuary and the altar of burnt offerings (see note on Matthew 21:12). The Zacharias, whether the son of Joddai or Barachiah, was murdered ‘in the court of the house of the Lord.’ Rabbinic tradition recalls this act as particularly shameful and opposed to divine will (Targum Lamentations 2:20).”

The blood of the innocent, spilled on earth, would fall upon the Jews of that era because, as Blessed Theophylact notes, “they had to be punished more than their forefathers, for they remained unrepentant after such examples” and repeated the sins of their ancestors.