Ezechiel 18:2
That you use among you this parable as a proverb in the land of Israel, saying: The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the teeth of the children are set on edge.
Open Ezechiel 18:2 in the Motif Searcher, word by word across all five texts →Show on the spiral →The verse in its languages
- Vulgate (Clementine)
- Quid est quod inter vos parabolam vertitis in proverbium istud in terra Israël, dicentes : Patres comederunt uvam acerbam, et dentes filiorum obstupescunt ?
- Septuagint (Swete)
- Υἱὲ ἀνθρώπου, τί ὑμῖν ἡ παραβολὴ αὕτη ἐν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ, λέγοντες Οἱ πατέρες ἔφαγον ὄμφακα, καὶ οἱ ὀδόντες τῶν τέκνων ἐγομφίασαν;
- Hebrew (WLC)
- מַה לָּכֶ֗ם אַתֶּם֙ מֹֽשְׁלִים֙ אֶת הַמָּשָׁ֣ל הַזֶּ֔ה עַל אַדְמַ֥ת יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לֵאמֹ֑ר אָבוֹת֙ יֹ֣אכְלוּ בֹ֔סֶר וְשִׁנֵּ֥י הַבָּנִ֖ים תִּקְהֶֽינָה
Haydock's commentary
Edge. Those in captivity would not allow that they were punished for their own sins: God convinces them of the contrary. (Worthington)
They knew that he often visited the sins of the fathers upon the children, (Exodus xx. 5., and xxiv. 5.; Calmet) when they also hated him, (Haydock) and that many had suffered for their parents' faults, like those of Saul, David, &c. (Calmet)
But these were all guilty of original sin at least, and death is not always a real misfortune. (Haydock)
God seems to allow that the complaints had hitherto had some grounds, (Jeremias xxxi.) but that they should be removed after the captivity, and still more effectually by the death of Christ, who came to redeem sinners, and rejected none. By baptism he cancels original sin, the sour grape, and those who cannot receive it are not innocent. (Calmet)
God chastises the body, but not the soul of children, for their parents' faults: (Menochius) and this conduct is a trial for them, which may increase their glory. (Haydock)
From Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary, 1859, in the transcription made by Todd Easton and kept online by John Paul Wohlschied at johnblood.gitlab.io/haydock.
The Fathers on this verse
Tertullian On Monogamy, Chapter VII
After the ancient examples of the patriarchs, let us equally pass on to the ancient documents of the legal Scriptures, that we may treat in order of all our canon. And since there are some who sometimes assert that they have nothing to do with the law (which Christ has not dissolved, but fulfilled), sometimes catch at such parts of the law as they choose; plainly do we too assert that the law has deceased in this sense, that its burdens, according to the sentence of the apostles, which not even the fathers were able to sustain, have wholly ceased: such (parts), however, as relate to righteousness not only permanently remain reserved, but even amplified; in order, to be sure, that our righteousness may be able to redound above the righteousness of the scribes and of the Pharisees. If “righteousness” must, of course chastity must too. …
Origen Origen Against Celsus, Chapter XL
Such is our doctrine of punishment; and the inculcation of this doctrine turns many from their sins. But let us see, on the other hand, what is the response given on this subject by the priest of Jupiter or Apollo of whom Celsus speaks. It is this: “The mills of the gods grind slowly.” Another describes punishment as reaching “to children’s children, and to those who came after them.” How much better are those words of Scripture: “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children for the fathers. …
St Augustine The Enchiridion, It is Probable that Children are Involved in the Guilt Not Only of the First Pair, But of Their Own Immediate Parents
And it is said, with much appearance of probability, that infants are involved in the guilt of the sins not only of the first pair, but of their own immediate parents. For that divine judgment, “I shall visit the iniquities of the fathers upon the children,” certainly applies to them before they come under the new covenant by regeneration. And it was this new covenant that was prophesied of, when it was said by Ezekiel, that the sons should not bear the iniquity of the fathers, and that it should no longer be a proverb in Israel, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.” Here lies the necessity that each man should be born again, that he might be freed from the sin in which he was born. For the sins committed afterwards can be cured by penitence, as we see is the case after baptism. …
St John Chrysostom The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John, John 9.1,2
This He saith not as acquitting them of sins, for He saith not simply, “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents,” but addeth, “that he should have been born blind, but that the Son of God should be glorified in him.” “For both this man hath sinned and his parents, but his blindness proceedeth not from that.” And this He said, not signifying that though this man indeed was not in such case, yet that others had been made blind from such a cause, the sins of their parents, since it cannot be that when one sinneth another should be punished. For if we allow this, we must also allow that he sinned before his birth. As therefore when He declared, “neither hath this man sinned,” He said not that it is possible to sin from one’s very birth, and be punished for it; so when He said, “nor his parents,” He said not that one may be punished for his parents’ sake. …