Christ’s lineage

The generation of Christ

1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham: [n. 12]

11. Among the evangelists, Matthew is especially concerned with the humanity of Christ; hence according to Gregory he is signified by a man in the figure of the four animals.¹ Now, it is through his humanity that Christ entered, advanced in, and left the world.

And for this reason the whole Gospel is divided into three parts.

For the Evangelist treats first of Christ’s entrance into the world through his humanity;

second, of his advance;

third, of his departure.

The second part begins at and in those days came John the Baptist preaching in the desert of Judea (Matt 3:1). The third part begins at and when they drew near to Jerusalem, and had come to Bethphage, unto Mount Olivet (Matt 21:1).

In the first part he does two things:

first, he describes the generation of Christ;

second, he adds a manifestation of that generation, at when Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Judah, in the days of King Herod (Matt 2:1).

In the first part, he does three things:

first, he prefaces a title as it were of the whole book, when he says, the book of the generation of Jesus Christ;

second, the series of fathers is put together, Abraham begot Isaac (Matt 1:2);

third, when it says but the generation of Christ was thus, the generation of Christ is described in particular.

12. Now the title prefaced is this: the book of the generation of Jesus Christ.

It seems to be an imperfect sentence, since a nominative is set down there without a verb, but it is not. For Matthew wrote his Gospel for the Hebrews, and so in his writing he followed the custom of the Jews. Now it is customary among the Hebrews to speak this way; for example, when it is said: the vision of Isaiah the son of Amos (Isa 1:1), the phrase this is is understood, and does not need to be added. So here when it says, the book of the generation, this is is understood.

And this way of speaking is also customary among us. For if we wish to give a title to some book, it is called Priscianus the Greater or Lesser, nor is it necessary to add this is or here begins.

13. It is also asked, why did he title his book this way, when a very small portion of this book is about the generation of Christ?

And one should say that Matthew, who wrote to the Hebrews, followed the style of the Hebrews in his writing. Now, the Hebrews customarily title books from their beginnings, as Genesis is called Genesis because it treats there of generation; hence we find, this is the book of the generation of Adam (Gen 5:1). And so also the book of Exodus, which in the first part treats of the exodus of the children of Israel out of Egypt.

14. But it is asked why of Jesus Christ is added.

One should say that according to the Apostle: as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive (1 Cor 15:22). Now, Matthew had seen that in the first book of the Old Testament, which treats of generation, it says: this is the book of the generation of Adam (Gen 5:1). In order therefore that the New Testament, which treats of regeneration and repair, might correspond to the Old Testament by contrast, he says, the book of the generation of Jesus Christ; and to show that the same one is author of both Testaments.

15. But here a question is asked about the fact that it says, the book of the generation of Jesus Christ. For this is contrary to Isaiah: who will declare his generation? (Isa 53:8).

According to Jerome, the sense of this quotation is that there is a twofold generation in Christ.¹ There is the divine generation, of course, which cannot be recounted; even if in some way we call the Son begotten, neither man nor angel can comprehend the manner in which he is begotten. The other is the human generation, which Matthew considers, yet there are many difficulties in this generation as well. And this is why, according to Remigius, there are very few who could recount it.²

16. Again, a question is asked about the fact that he says of the generation, when multiple generations are put together here.

One should say that, although many generations are enumerated, still all are included for the sake of one, namely for the sake of the generation of Christ, concerning which it says below, but the generation of Christ was thus.

17. Now, he whose generation is put together is described first by name, when it says Jesus; second by office, when it says Christ; third by origin, when it says, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

18. There have been others who were also called Jesus, like Jesus the son of Nave, of whom it is said: valiant in war was Jesus the son of Nave, who was successor of Moses among the prophets (Sir 46:1); there was also another around the time of the building of the temple (Zech 3:1). But those men were Jesus in name and figure, namely insofar as they prefigured him.

That Jesus led the people of Israel into the land of the promise; but this Jesus, i.e., our Savior, led us not into a fleshly land, but into a heavenly land. For we have him as the author and finisher in his blood (Heb 12:2).

And he is rightly called Jesus. This name befits him according to either nature, whether the divine or the human. Through the human he suffered in his flesh and completed the mystery of our redemption; but since that suffering would have had no efficacy except by the power of the divinity joined to it, it says below: you will call his name Jesus. For he will save his people from their sins (Matt 1:21).

But it is asked why he says, Christ. Would not Jesus have been enough? I respond that he said this because others were also called Jesus.

19. Moreover he describes him by office when he says, Christ, i.e., the anointed.

Note that there were three anointings in the old law. For Aaron was anointed as a priest (Lev 8:11–12). Saul was anointed by Samuel as a king (1 Sam 10:1), and then David (1 Sam 16:13). Eliseus was also anointed as a prophet: Eliseus the son of Saphat, of Abelmeula, you will anoint to be prophet (1 Kgs 19:16). Since therefore Christ was a true priest, according to the Psalm: you are a priest for ever (Ps 109:4), and a king and a prophet, he is rightly called Christ, on account of the three offices which he exercised.

20. The son of David, the son of Abraham. Here there are two questions, namely about number and order.

21. Here it should be noted that there have been many errors about Christ.

For some have erred about his divinity, as did Paul of Samosata, Photinus, and Sabellius; some have erred about his humanity; and some have erred about both. Others have erred about his person.

The first to err about his humanity was Manichaeus, who said that he took up, not a true body, but the appearance of a body. Contrary to this is what the Lord says: handle, and see: for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see me to have (Luke 24:39). Second, after Manichaeus, Valentinus erred, who said that he took for himself a celestial body, and that he did not take it up from the Virgin but rather passed through her like water through a canal.¹ But contrary to this it is said: who was made to him of the seed of David, according to the flesh (Rom 1:3). The third error was that of Apollinaris, who said that he took only a body and not a soul, but that he had the divinity in place of a soul.² But contrary to this is what is frequently said: now is my soul troubled. But because of this saying, Apollinarus himself later changed his position and said that Christ had a vegetative and a sensitive soul, but nonetheless not a rational soul, but rather in its place the divinity. But in this case something unfitting would follow, namely that Christ would be no more a man than one of the brutes.

Now, the four evangelists have divided these errors among themselves by lot, so to speak. For Mark and John have destroyed chiefly those errors which concern the divinity. Hence John says right away at the beginning of his Gospel: in the beginning was the Word. And Mark starts this way: the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; he does not say, the son of Abraham. But Matthew and Luke at the beginning of their Gospels destroy those errors which concern his humanity.

22. So notice that when it says here, the son of David, the son of Abraham, all errors which concern Christ’s humanity are excluded.

For one is only called someone’s son through a univocal generation, which is according to a sameness in species. For however much a thing may be generated from a man, it will never be called a son unless it shares the same nature in species, as is clear from the case of lice and other such creatures. If therefore Christ is the son of David and of Abraham, he must have the same nature as they do by reason of the same species; moreover, he would not have the same nature according to species if he did not have a true and natural body, nor if he had taken it from heaven, nor if he had lacked a sensitive soul, or a rational soul. Hence the exclusion of every error is clear.

Abraham to David

1:2 Abraham begot Isaac. And Isaac begot Jacob. And Jacob begot Judas and his brethren. [n. 24]

1:3 And Judas begot Phares and Zara of Thamar. And Phares begot Esron. And Esron begot Aram. [n. 33]

1:4 And Aram begot Aminadab. And Aminadab begot Naasson. And Naasson begot Salmon. [n. 38]

1:5 And Salmon begot Booz of Rahab. And Booz begot Obed of Ruth. And Obed begot Jesse. [n. 45]

1:6 And Jesse begot David the King. And David the King begot Solomon, of her that had been the wife of Urias. [n. 51]

23. Having set down the title, here he puts together the series of the genealogy. And it is divided into three parts, according to the three fourteens by which the aforesaid genealogical series is put together.

The first fourteen is from Abraham to David, which proceeds through the patriarchs. The second is from David to the deportation to Babylon, and proceeds through the kings. The third is from the Babylonian deportation to Christ, and, beginning from leaders, it proceeds through private persons.

The second begins at David the King begot Solomon. The third, at and after the transmigration of Babylon (Matt 1:12).

The first is divided into three parts. For the fathers who lived before the entrance into Egypt are placed first; second are placed those who lived at the time of the exodus and of the entrance into the promised land; third, those who lived after the entrance into the promised land.

24. He says then first, Abraham begot Isaac.

Before we proceed further, recall that two of the evangelists trace Christ’s generation according to the flesh, namely Luke and Matthew; but each traces it differently. There are differences between them in five respects. For they differ: first, as regards location in the Gospel; second, as regards the order of names; third, as regards the manner of expression; fourth, as regards the point where they end; fifth, as regards the persons enumerated.

25. First, I say that they differ according to location in the Gospel. For Matthew commences putting together the generation of Christ at the beginning of his Gospel; Luke places it, not at the beginning, but after the baptism.

According to Augustine, the reason for this is that Matthew took up the fleshly generation of Christ as the thing to be described, and so he had to put it right at the beginning. Luke however intended most of all to set forward in Christ a priestly person; now the expiation of sins pertains to a priest, and so Luke fittingly places the generation of Christ after a baptism, in which the expiation of sins takes place.

26. Second, Luke and Matthew differ in putting together Christ’s genealogy as regards order. For Matthew puts together Christ’s generation by beginning with Abraham and descending to Christ, while Luke begins from Christ and, ascending, proceeds to Abraham and beyond.

The reason is that, as the Apostle says (Rom 4:25), there are two things in Christ, namely the humility of accepting the defects of our nature, and the power of the divinity and of grace through which he purified us from such defects; God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh and of sin, because of the first, and has condemned sin in the flesh (Rom 8:3), because of the second. Matthew, therefore, who aims at the fleshly generation of Christ, through which he descended even to the assumption of our weakness, fittingly describes his generation by descending. But Luke, who sets forward his priestly dignity, through which we are reconciled to God and united to Christ himself, fittingly proceeds by ascending.

27. Third, they differ as regards manner. For in recounting the genealogy Matthew uses the verb begot while Luke uses the verb was. And this is because in his entire account Matthew includes only those who were fathers according to the flesh, while Luke includes many who were fathers according to law, or adoption. For the law commanded that if someone were to die without children, his brother should take his wife and beget children for him; hence those children did not belong to the one who begot them, but rather by a kind of adoption they were imputed to the first man. Hence Luke, who includes more than one son begotten by adoption, does not say begot, but who was; because although they had not begotten those men, nevertheless those men were theirs by a kind of adoption. But Matthew, who put down only fathers according to the flesh, says begot.

Now the reason for this is that, as was said, Matthew is concerned with Christ’s humanity. And since according to the flesh he was born of fathers according to the flesh, Matthew placed none in the genealogy who were not fathers according to the flesh. But Luke emphasizes Christ’s priestly dignity, through which we are adopted as sons of God, and so he puts down not only fleshly but also legal fathers.

28. Fourth, they differ as regards the ending point. For Matthew begins his generation from Abraham and extends it to Christ; Luke however extends his genealogy from Christ, not only to Abraham, but even to God.

The reason for this can be found in the fact that Matthew wrote to the Hebrews. Now the Hebrews prided themselves chiefly on Abraham. We are the seed of Abraham (John 8:33), who was the first beginning of believing. And so Matthew began from Abraham. But Luke wrote to the Greeks, who knew nothing of Abraham except through Christ; for if there had not been Christ, they would never have known anything about Abraham. And so Luke began from Christ, and ended not merely in Abraham, but in God.

29. Fifth, they differ as regards the persons enumerated. For in the whole series of the genealogy Luke mentions absolutely nothing about a woman, but in Matthew some women are interspersed.

According to Ambrose, the reason for this is that Luke, as was said, sets forward most of all the priestly dignity. Now in a priest, purity is required most of all. But Matthew puts together his generation according to the flesh, and for this reason some women are set down there.

30. Yet one should notice that in the entire genealogy of Matthew the only women set down are sinners, or those who were known for some sin, as was Thamar who fornicated (Gen 38), and Ruth who was an idolater because she was a gentile, and the wife of Urias who was an adulteress (2 Sam 11). And according to Jerome, this is to point out that he whose genealogy is put together here entered for the sake of redeeming sinners.

Ambrose touches upon another reason, namely to remove the Church’s embarrassment. For if Christ willed to be born of sinners, unbelievers ought not to laugh if sinners come to the Church.

Another reason can be given, I believe according to Chrysostom, namely to show the imperfection of the law, and to show that Christ came to fulfill the law. For the fact that certain sinful women are mentioned points out that those who were greatest in the law were sinners, such as David and Judas. And by this he points out the imperfection of the others; for if those men were sinners, much more the others as well. All have sinned (Rom 3:23). And so these are placed in the generation of Christ to indicate that he himself had fulfilled the law.

Yet notice that those women, however much they may all have been sinners, still they were not sinners during the time in which their genealogy was put together, but were already cleansed through penitence.

31. He says then, Abraham begot Isaac. One should note first that there are three things here to be considered: the letter, or the literal sense; second, that the fathers who are set down designate Christ; third, that even they are referred, or can be referred, to our instruction.

He says then first, Abraham begot Isaac. And this is found elsewhere in Scripture (Gen 21). And Isaac begot Jacob (Gen 25).

32. Jacob begot Judas and his brethren. Here it is asked, since Abraham had another son besides Isaac, namely Ishmael, and similarly Isaac had other sons, why does he not mention them the way it says here, Judas and his brethren?

Similarly, why is Judas mentioned by name any more than the others?

The reason is that Judas and his brothers remained under the worship of the one God, and this is why they are mentioned in the generation of Christ. And it does not say, Isaac and Ishmael, or Jacob and Esau.

33. And Judas begot Phares and Zara of Thamar. Here it is asked, since the Lord was not born of Zara, but of Phares, why he is mentioned.

And why he is described by name? For previously it said, his brethren. So why does he mention the name of Zara?

And one should say, according to Ambrose, that this was done in a mystery. To make this clear, notice the history, that in Thamar’s labor Zara appeared first (Gen 38). The midwife tied a scarlet thread onto his hand, saying, this will come forth the first, and so she called his name Zara. Later, he drawing back his hand, the other came forth, and the midwife said, why is the partition divided for you? Now Zara, who appeared first, signifies the people of the Jews, onto whose hand the midwife tied a scarlet thread, that is, circumcision, which was accompanied by a flow of blood. But he drawing back his hand, the other came forth (2 Cor 1), because blindness in part has happened in Israel (Rom 11:25). For in this way the gentile people, separated from God’s people, entered into the light of faith. It came forth from the womb of ignorance and unbelief.

34. Second, one should note that Christ is signified by the fathers set down in the generation of Christ by reason either of name, or of deed, or of some other thing, as is self-evident.

Abraham is interpreted ‘father of many nations’. He signifies Christ, about whom it is said, who had brought many children into glory (Heb 2:10). Again, Abraham left his own land at the Lord’s command (Gen 12:4), and it is Christ who said: I have forsaken my house (Jer 12:7). Similarly it was Abraham who laughed, saying: God has made a laughter for me (Gen 21:6), and it is Christ at whose birth joy was announced, not to one person only, but to the whole world. Behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, that shall be to all the people (Luke 2:10). Similarly, Christ is signified by Jacob, both because of the interpretation of his name and because of what he did, as is clear in the fact that he placed a stone, i.e., the severity of the cross, beneath his head. Similarly by Judas and Phares, who is interpreted ‘division’; for he will divide the sheep from the goats (Matt 25:32).

35. Now the status of our justification is indicated morally in these generations, according to the six things required for justification.

Namely, faith is signifed by Abraham, who was justified by the justice of faith. For elsewhere he is called a beginning of faith for others; which is in the flesh of our circumcision (Rom 4:11). Isaac signifies hope, because he is interpreted as ‘laughter’; rejoicing in hope (Rom 12:12). Love is signified by Jacob, who took two wives, Lia, whose name means ‘laboring’, and Rachel; two lives, which are lived in love in keeping with the two precepts: the contemplative life, which delights in God, and the active life, through which one’s neighbor is helped. Judas signifies confession, which is twofold: the confession of faith: with the heart, we believe (Rom 10:10); and the confession of sinners: confess therefore your sins one to another (Jas 5:16). Now two effects follow from this, namely the destruction of vice, which is signified by Phares, and the beginning of virtue, which is signified by Zara. And these arise from Thamar, who is interpreted ‘bitterness’; I will recount to you all my years in the bitterness of my soul (Isa 38:15).

36. And Phares begot Esron. Here is set down the series of the genealogy of the fathers who were born in Egypt or in the exodus. For as Christ is signified through Phares, who is interpreted as ‘division’: he will separate them one from another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats (Matt 25:32), so he is also signified through Esron, who is interpreted ‘arrow’, or ‘hall’. For he is called ‘arrow’ on account of the efficacy of his preaching, by which he pierced the hearts of those who heard: your arrows are sharp (Ps 44:6). He is called ‘hall’ on account of the breadth of his charity, by which he loved not only friends, but even enemies: when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son (Rom 5:10); he has prayed for the transgressors (Isa 53:12); and: Father, forgive them: for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34).

37. And Esron begot Aram. Now Aram is interpreted ‘elect’, or ‘exalted’. Behold my servant, and he is exalted above all (Isa 42:1); setting him on his right hand in the heavenly places, above all principality (Eph 1:21).

38. And Aram begot Aminadab, who is interpreted ‘spontaneous’. It is in his person that the Psalmist says: I will freely sacrifice to you, and will give praise, O God, to your name: because it is good (Ps 53:8); and: he has borne the sins of many, and has prayed for the transgressors (Isa 53:12); I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me (John 6:38).

39. And Aminadab begot Naasson, who is interpreted ‘omen’ or ‘serpent-like’, because Christ knew not only the present but also the past and the future; all things are naked and open to his eyes (Heb 4:13). Similarly, ‘serpent-like’ because of prudence, for prudence is attributed to the serpent. Below: be therefore wise as serpents (Matt 10:16); with him is strength and wisdom: he knows both the deceiver, and him who is deceived (Job 12:16).

40. Note that this man Naasson lived in the time of Moses, and came out with him from Egypt, and was one of the princes of the tribe of Judah in the desert (Num 1:7).

But one should be aware that where our texts have, the children of Israel went up armed out of the land of Egypt (Exod 13:18), Aquila translated it as instructed, owing to an equivocation. But the text of the Septuagint is better: the children of Israel went up out of Egypt in the fifth generation.

41. On the contrary: Naasson was not the fifth from Jacob, but the seventh, as is clear by counting up Jacob, Judas, and so on, down to Naasson. Therefore it was not in the fifth, but in the seventh generation.

But it is said that it should not be calculated through the tribe of Judas, but through the tribe of Levi, under whose leadership the children of Israel went up out of Egypt; you have conducted your people like sheep, by the hand of Moses and Aaron (Ps 76:21). And it is clear that there were only five generations counting this way: for Jacob begot Levi, and Levi begot Caath, and Caath begot Amram, and Amram begot Moses and Aaron (Exod 6:20). And under Moses they went up from the land of Egypt.

42. Note here that, among all the tribes, the tribe of Judas was multiplying the most, because from that tribe were to come kings, who were supposed to fight. But among them all, the tribe of Levi was multiplying the least, because it was preordained to the divine service and to the priesthood, for which a smaller number sufficed. But Jerome would have it that they went up in the fifth generation even calculating through the tribe of Judas. In the fifth generation they will return hither (Gen 15:16). Therefore, Jerome says, what is said there should be understood by calculating through the tribe of Levi, but what is said here should be understood by calculating through the tribe of Judas. For Phares himself entered into Egypt with Jacob and his father Judas. And it is clear that Naasson was the fifth from Phares. Similarly, Levi himself entered into Egypt with his father Jacob. And therefore the generations should be calculated from Levi, and not from Jacob. And it is clear that Moses was the fourth from Levi.

43. And Naasson begot Salmon. Salmon is interpreted ‘sensitive’; and he signifies Christ, in whom all treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden (Col 2:3).

44. Morally, one should note here that as in the first generation the order of our justification as regards the status of the beginner is signified, so in this second generation, which similarly contains five, the progress of the proficient is signified. For the first thing following from the fact that a man is justified from sin is that he has zeal for souls. And therefore well did Phares beget Esron, who is interpreted ‘arrow’, owing to the efficacy of the preaching by which the hearts of those who hear are pierced; he . . . has made me as a chosen arrow (Isa 49:2). And the others fit in the same way.

45. And Salmon begot Booz. Here are placed the fathers who were born after the entrance into the land of promise. For Salmon was begotten in the desert, and entered with Josue into the land of promise, and took Rahab the harlot as his wife, from whom he begot Booz.

Booz is interpreted ‘strong’; O Lord, my might, and my strength (Jer 16:19). Rahab is interpreted as ‘hunger’ or ‘width’; and she signifies the Church, because to her pertains that beatitude: blessed are they who hunger and thirst (Matt 5:6). She is also interpreted as ‘width’, because the Church is spread throughout the whole world; stretch out the skins of your tabernacles (Isa 54:2). Similarly, she is interpreted as ‘attack’, because by the attack of preaching she has converted kings and philosophers. Again, she signifies the Church by reason of deed. Rahab put a scarlet rope in her window, through which she was freed from the sacking of Jericho (Jos 2:21). Our window is the mouth; therefore the rope in the window is the confession of Christ’s passion, through which the Church is freed from death. Again by reason of her spouse, because as Rahab was joined in marriage to Salmon, who was a prince of the tribe of Judah, so Christ has espoused the Church to himself; for I have espoused you to one husband that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ (2 Cor 11:2).

46. But it is asked, according to the letter, since Rahab was a harlot, how was she espoused to so great a prince, who was great among other princes?

And one should say that what Rahab did was most great, because she chose the worship of the God of Israel in contempt of her own people and of the rite of her fathers. And therefore as a most great honor, as it were, she was given to a most noble prince.

47. And Booz begot Obed of Ruth. This is found in the last chapter of Ruth. Obed is interpreted ‘serving’ or ‘servant’; and he signifies Christ, of whom it was said through the prophet: but you have made me to serve with your sins (Isa 43:24). Moreover, Ruth signifies the Church born from the gentiles by reason of place, for she was a Moabitess. Moab is interpreted ‘from father’; you are of your father the devil (John 8:44); and again by reason of her spouse, as is clear in the Gloss.

48. But it is asked why these women are named here, since they were sinners.

Jerome gives a reason for Ruth, namely that the prophesy of Isaiah might be fulfilled: send forth, O Lord, the lamb, the ruler of the earth, from Petra of the desert (Isa 16:1). Petra is from the desert, that is from evil, and signifies Ruth the Moabitess. Ambrose also gives a reason, saying: for it was going to happen that the Church would be gathered together from the unbelieving nations; and so the Church could have blushed and been embarrassed if they had not seen that even Christ was born from sinners. Hence to remove the blushing and embarrassment, these sinners had to be named.

49. But it is asked: the Ammonite and the Moabite, even after the tenth generation will not enter into the Church of the Lord for ever (Deut 23:3); so since Ruth was a Moabitess, how was she received into the Church?

But one should say through the Apostle, that if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law (Gal 5:18); for in a law, the intention of the legislator ought always to be observed more than the words of the law. For what was the reason why the Lord commanded that the Ammonites and Moabites not enter the Church? Clearly, because he found idolatry in them, i.e., lest they drag the Jews into idolatry. Hence this woman, who was already converted, was not an idolater, and so was not subject to the prohibition.

50. And Obed begot Jesse (also Ruth 4:22). Now Jesse is interpreted as ‘sacrifice’ or ‘burning’; and he signifies him who offered himself as a victim to God in the odor of sweetness.

But it is asked: since this man is called by another name, Isai, as is clear in many places in 1 Samuel, and this name is more solemn, why did the Evangelist not name him this way?

And one should say that this was done to show that the prophecy which was spoken through the prophet Isaiah was fulfilled in Christ: and there will come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower will rise up out of his root (Isa 11:1).

51. And Jesse begot David the King. David is interpreted as ‘strong of hand’ and ‘desirable in appearance’; all of which belongs to Christ, as is clear. For he who overcame the devil is strong; but if a stronger one than he come upon him, and overcome him; he will take away all his armour in which he trusted, and will distribute his spoils (Luke 11:22). Similarly, he is beautiful above the sons of men (Ps 44:3).

52. But here it is asked: since there were many other kings, why is only this man called a king? And one should say that this man was the first king in the tribe of Judas, from whom the Lord is descended; for although Saul was a king, yet he was of the tribe of Benjamin. A second reason, because it was owing to the merit of David himself that the others reigned; and I will make his seed to endure for evermore: and his throne as the days of heaven (Ps 88:30). A third reason, to show that the prophecy of Jeremiah was fulfilled: I will raise up to David a just branch: and a king will reign, and will be wise, and will execute judgment and justice in the earth (Jer 23:5); he will sit upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom (Isa 9:7).

53. But morally, the fruit of those who are perfect is indicated in this generation, as in the others the fruits of the beginners and of the proficients are indicated.

For the first thing which is required in a perfect man is that he be strong in attacking adversities, so that he will not be held back on account of some difficulty; and this is signified through Booz, who is interpreted as ‘strong’; but they that hope in the Lord will renew their strength, they will take wings as eagles, they will run and not be weary, they will walk and not faint (Isa 40:31); who will find a valiant woman? (Prov 31:10). The second thing required is the humility of one who serves, so that to the degree he is great, to that degree he will humble himself in all things; and this is signified through Obed, who is interpreted as ‘the one serving’ or ‘servant’; he who is the greatest among you will be your servant (Matt 23:11). The third thing required is fervor of charity, which is signified through Jesse, who is interpreted as ‘burnt’, or ‘burning’; let my prayer be directed as incense in thy sight (Ps 140:2). And from this, one comes to the kingdom and to glory, for Jesse begot David the King: and has made us to our God a kingdom and priests (Rev 5:10); but you are a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people (1 Pet 2:9).

David to the Babylonian exile

1:6 And Jesse begot David the King. And David the King begot Solomon, of her that had been the wife of Urias. [n. 55]

1:7 And Solomon begot Roboam. And Roboam begot Abia. And Abia begot Asa. [n. 59]

1:8 And Asa begot Josaphat. And Josaphat begot Joram. And Joram begot Ozias. [n. 62]

1:9 And Ozias begot Joatham. And Joatham begot Achaz. And Achaz begot Ezechias. [n. 68]

1:10 And Ezechias begot Manasses. And Manesses begot Amon. And Amon begot Josias. [n. 71]

1:11 And Josias begot Jechonias and his brethren in the transmigration of Babylon. [n. 74]

54. The series of the genealogy of the fathers which ran through the patriarchs having been set down, here he sets down the series of the fathers which proceeds through the kings. And it is divided into two parts.

First, he sets down the kings who were born from Israel, without mixture of alien seed; second, he sets down the kings who came from a foreign marriage, at Joram begot Ozias.

55. Here there is a twofold question. For Luke, working out the generation of Christ, ascends through Nathan; but Matthew, descending, proceeds from David to Christ through Solomon. Hence there seems to be a certain contrariety.

But one should say, as was said before, that Luke places many fathers in Christ’s genealogy who were not fathers according to fleshly origin, through propogation, but according to legal adoption; but Matthew set down no one who was not a father according to the flesh.

And it is true that, according to the flesh, the Lord descended from David through Solomon, and not through Nathan; and nevertheless, according to Augustine, it is not an empty mystery that Matthew descends from David to Christ through Solomon, while Luke ascends from Christ to David through Nathan. For Matthew undertook to describe the fleshly generation of Christ, according to which Christ descended even to the likeness of the body of sin (Rom 8:3); and so Matthew rightly descends from David through Solomon in his generation, with whose mother David sinned; but Luke, who aimed most of all at the priestly dignity of Christ, through which the expiation of sins came about, rightly ascends to David through Nathan, who was a holy man.

But note that according to the same Augustine in the Book of Retractions, one should not understand that Nathan the prophet, who reproached him, and the son whom he bore were the same man, but only that they were alike in name.

56. Second, it is asked why Bathshebah is not named by her name, the way Thamar, Rahab, and Ruth were.

And one should say that the others, although they may have been sinners for some time, still afterwards they were converted and repentant; this one, however, basely sinned in the crime of adultery and in consent to a murder; and so her name is veiled for modesty’s sake.

57. Yet notice that in Scripture the sins of the great are sometimes recounted, like those of David and of others; and this is because the devil overthrows not only the small and lesser, but even the great, for he is our adversary. And so they are recounted for caution’s sake, that he who stands may watch lest he fall.

Another reason is so that no one will think them to be more than men. For if someone were to contemplate only the perfection in them, he could be deceived through idolatry; but when he sees them fall through sin, then he does not believe that there is anything more than man in them.

58. Note this also, according to Gregory: sometimes a thing done literally is bad and the thing signified is good; while sometimes the thing done is good and the thing signified is bad.

For Urias was a good man and just, nor was he blamed for anything in Scripture; and yet he signifies the devil. Bathshebah was a sinner, and yet she signifies a good thing, namely the Church, as the Gloss notes on 2 Samuel 12, and also the Gloss which is said to explain the figure according to the allegorical sense.

For Urias is interpreted as ‘God my light’, and signifies the devil, who desired the light of divinity; I will be like the Most High (Isa 14:14). Bathshebah is interpreted as ‘seven wells’, or ‘the well of society’; and she signifies the Church, gathered from the gentiles, because of the sevenfold grace of baptism. She first espoused herself to the devil; but David, i.e., Christ, took her away from him, and joined her to himself, and killed the devil. In another way, Bathshebah signifies the law, through whose paths the people were brought in, who did not wish to enter into the house through spiritual understanding, and therefore carried the letter of their own death, because the letter kills (2 Cor 3:6). But David, i.e., Christ, took the law away from the Jews, when he taught that it should be understood spiritually.

59. And Solomon begot Roboam. Now, as David is interpreted ‘strong of hand’, or ‘desirable in appearance’, so Solomon is interpreted ‘peaceful’: and this is right, because out of the strength of good works comes peace of conscience; much peace have they who love your law (Ps 118:165). Now, it happens that out of peace of conscience a man wishes others to come to the good.

Hence Solomon begot Roboam, who is interpreted ‘force’, because the one who has peace of conscience is moved by the force of preaching to spread the name of Christ; as is written about the apostles: when they will rush in unto Jacob, Israel will blossom and bud, and they will fill the face of the world with seed (Isa 27:6).

Moreover, either name signifies Christ, who is himself peace. Similarly, he who converted the people by the force of preaching is himself Roboam.

60. And Roboam begot Abia, who is interpreted ‘God the Father’; because by the fact that a man is eager for the spiritual profit of others, or for the corporeal profit of others through works of mercy, he is made worthy of the fatherhood of God, as is said below: pray for those who persecute and calumniate you: that you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven (Matt 5:44). And: be therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful (Luke 6:36).

This also belongs to Christ, to whom it is said: I will be to him a Father, and he will be to me a Son (Heb 1:5).

61. And Abia begot Asa, who is interpreted ‘lifting up’; because sometimes by the fact that a man is made a father and superior to others, he falls into a certain negligence out of security; this is why Abia begot Asa, that is, in order that a man may be continually perfected, and lift himself up toward greater things.

This also belongs to Christ, who is called ‘one lifting up’, i.e., growing; and the child grew (Luke 2:40). Or ‘one lifting up’, because he lifts away the sins of the world.

62. And Asa begot Josaphat, who is interpreted ‘one judging’, because when a man is always growing spiritually, he is made one who judges; but the spiritual man judges all things (1 Cor 2:15).

And this belongs to Christ, because the Father has given all judgment to the Son (John 5:22).

63. And Josaphat begot Joram, who is interpreted, ‘one dwelling on high’, because he who is made a judge ought to dwell on high; he will dwell on high (Isa 33:16). And the Apostle says how this should be: but our conversation is in heaven (Phil 3:20).

And this belongs to Christ, because he is high above all nations (Ps 112:4).

64. And Joram begot Ozias. Here there is a literal question. For it is said that Joram begot Ochozias (1 Chr 3:11). Now Ochozias begot Joas, and Joas begot Amasias, who is also called Azarias. And Amasias begot Ozias. So the Evangelist seems to have been mistaken in two things. First, because Joram did not beget Ozias, but rather Amasias did; second, because he omits three generations.

And with regard to the first difficulty, one should say that for someone to beget someone can be understood in two ways, mediately and immediately: immediately, as a fleshly father immediately begets his son; and in this way Joram did not beget Ozias. In another way mediately, as we are called sons of Adam; and in this way a son can be said to be begotten by his grandfather or his great grandfather, because he descended from him through an intermediate generation.

65. And as to why he omits three kings, three reasons can be given. First, by Jerome, who says, as it is also written: the Lord visits the sins of the fathers on the third and the fourth generation, on those who are made imitaters of their fathers’ crimes (Exod 20:5). Now, Joram took as a wife the daughter of Jezabel, namely Athalia, who drew him into idolatry. Ochozias was given to idolatry even more than his father. And likewise with Joas, who along with the crime of idolatry also killed Zacharias the son of Joiada; and for this reason these three are excluded from the Christ’s generation, as though unworthy.

Chrysostom gives another reason. For the Lord commanded Jehu the son of Namsi to wipe out the house of Achab (2 Kgs 9); he was diligent in carrying out the command, but still he did not withdraw from the worship of the gods, for he adored molten bulls. And because he diligently performed the command of the Lord by destroying the house of Achab, he was told that his sons would sit on the throne of Israel until the fourth generation; hence as Jehu merited the kingdom of Israel until the third or fourth generation, so in the opposite way Joram, who mixed himself with gentile women, and carried the iniquity of the house of Israel over into the house of Judah, had to lose the name of his posterity in Christ’s genealogy until the fourth generation, expiation for the sin having then been made.

Augustine gives another reason in Questions on the Old and New Testaments. For he says that some men were good, and had good men as fathers, like Isaac and Jacob; some men were evil, and yet had good men as fathers, like Solomon, who was a sinner, and yet had David as a father, a man just and holy; some men were neither good nor had good men as fathers, as were these three, as is clear from what has been said. Joram sinned, and his sin was continued until Ozias, who did almost nothing bad, except that he burned incense; but the continuation of sin is the cause or reason for destruction. And so these three who persisted in the sin of idolatry are excluded from Christ’s genealogy.

66. Moreover, mystically, a reason is given on account of the three fourteens, through which Matthew intended to trace out the genealogy of Christ. Now, Ozias is interpreted ‘strong one of the Lord’; and he signifies Christ, of whom it is said: the Lord is my strength and my praise: and he is become my salvation (Ps 117:14). Further, Joram begot Ozias mystically, because he who dwells on high ought to work strongly.

67. Note that Isaiah prophesied under Ozias, as is clear from: the vision of Isaiah the son of Amos, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Ozias, Joathan, Achaz, and Ezechias, kings of Judah (Isa 1:1). For owing to the sin of the princes, and the kings, and even the people, God took away prophecy and teaching; hence under a good king the flow of prophecy began again.

68. And Ozias begot Joatham, who is interpreted ‘advance’; and he signifies Christ, through whom the Church makes advances daily. And thus well did Ozias beget Joatham, because he who works strongly is continually advancing; they will go from virtue to virtue (Ps 83:8).

69. And Joatham begot Achaz, who is interpreted as ‘one who comprehends’; because through unceasing advance in virtue a man comes to the knowledge of God; by your commandments I have had understanding: therefore have I hated every way of iniquity (Ps 118:104); and they declared the works of God: and understood his doings (Ps 63:10). On account of which Paul says: I follow after, if I may by any means apprehend, wherein I am also apprehended by Christ Jesus (Phil 3:12). And this belongs to Christ, who alone perfectly comprehends the divinity; Matt 11:27, Neither does any one know the Father, but the Son.

70. And Achaz begot Ezechias, that is, ‘strong one of the Lord’; because such a one has strength from the Lord; the Lord is my rock, and my strength, and my savior (2 Sam 22:2). And this belongs to Christ, who is strong in battle (Ps 23:8).

71. And Ezechias begot Manasses, and he is interpreted ‘forgetfulness’, because he who knows God perfectly is forgetful of temporal things; forget your people and your father’s house (Ps 44:11); and he called the name of the first born Manasses, saying, God has made me to forget all my labors, and my father’s house (Gen 41:51).

And this belongs to Christ, of whom it is said: but if the wicked does penance for all his sins which he has committed . . . I will not remember all his iniquities that he has done (Ezek 18:21–22).

72. And Manesses begot Amon, i.e., ‘faithful’ and ‘nourisher’; because he is truly faithful who despises temporal things. For according to Gregory, fraud is the daughter of avarice, and so he who perfectly despises temporal things no longer wishes to be unfaithful. Hence it is right that Manesses begot Amon. He is also interpreted as ‘nourisher’ because he who despises temporal things ought from there to nourish the poor out of mercy; below: if you will be perfect, go sell what you have, behold, the contempt, and give to the poor, behold, the nourishment (Matt 19:21).

And this belongs to Christ, who is truly faithful: the Lord is faithful in all his words (Ps 144:13), and likewise a nourisher: and I was like a nourisher to Ephraim, I carried them in my arms: and they knew not that I healed them (Hos 11:3); and below: how often would I have gathered together your children, as the hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and you would not? (Matt 23:37).

73. And Amon begot Josias, who is interpreted as ‘health of the Lord’, or ‘incense’; because a man obtains health from the fact that that he is forgetful of temporal things and gives or distributes them freely. Or ‘incense’.

This belongs to Christ: he has wrought salvation in the midst of the earth (Ps 73:12); and he offered himself as a sacrifice to God in the odor of sweetness (Eph 5:2).

74. And Josias begot Jechonias and his brethren, who is interpreted as ‘the preparation of the Lord’, or ‘the resurrection’; and he signifies Christ, who prepared a place for us (John 14:2), and who said: I am the resurrection and the life (John 11:25), and through him we come to the resurrection.

75. Now there are three questions here according to the letter. First, it is asked how Josias is said to have begotten Jechonias; and yet he did not beget Jechonias himself, but rather begot his father Joakim.

And to this there are two responses. For according Chrysostom, with whom Augustine agrees, the name Joakim is omitted altogether; and this is because he did not reign by divine ordination, but through the power of Pharaoh, who established him in the kingdom, his first-born brother Joathas who reigned before him having been thrown in prison. And note the history about this (2 Kgs 22; 2 Chr 36). Josias also had three sons: Joathas, Joakim, who was also called Eliakim, and Sedecias. For if, as Augustine says, those three kings were removed from the genealogy because they were corrupted by idolotry, how much more this man, who was not established in the kingdom by God, or by a prophet, but was placed there by a gentile man?

This opinion is not what Jerome says, since he would have it, and Ambrose agrees with him, that both are called Joakim, both he who is placed at the end of the fourteen, and he who is placed in the beginning of the third, and that both Jechonias and Joakim are the same. Hence one should note that Josias had three sons: Joakim, who was also called Eliakim, Joathas, and Sedecias. Josias having died, Joathas reigned in his stead, that is, the middle son. When he was captured by Pharaoh the king of Egypt and thrown in prison, Pharaoh established his brother Joakim, the first-born, as king, imposing a tribute on him. Later, Nabuchodonosor the king of Babylon, having defeated the king of Egypt, laid siege to Jerusalem, and captured Joachim, whom he released into Jerusalem under tribute.

But later, when Joakim wished to rebel against the king of Babylon, relying on the help of the king of Egypt, Nabuchodonosor went up to Jerusalem and captured and killed him, and established his son Joachim in his stead, whom he named Jechonias as well, with the name of his father. After he had done this, Nabuchodonosor, fearing that he would remember his father’s death and make an alliance with the king of Egypt, returned to Jerusalem and besieged her; and Jechonias, or Joachim, namely the son of the other, gave himself up to Nabuchodonosor on the advice of Jeremiah, together with his wife and children; and these are properly said to have transmigrated in the transmigration. But Nabuchodonosor established Sedecias the brother of his father as his king, and led Joachim himself into Babylon; and it is he of whom it is said afterwards: and after the transmigration (Matt 1:12).

76. But why was he named Jechonias, since his name was Joachim?

And one should say that this name was given by a prophet, namely by Jeremiah; as I live, says the Lord, if Jechonias the son of Joakim the king of Judah were a ring on my right hand, I would pluck him thence (Jer 22:24); and below: is this man Jechonias an earthen and a broken vessel? (Jer 22:28). And so the Evangelist prefers to name him this way, so that the Evangelist might be seen to be in harmony with the prophet.

77. Notice also that although the name is the same, still it is written in different ways. For the name of the first Joakim is written with a ‘k’, and seems to be said Joakim; but the name of the second is written with a ghimel, and hence is said Joachim; and so they have different interpretations. For the first is interpreted as ‘the resurrection’, the second as ‘the preparation of the Lord’.

78. Second, it is asked why it says, Jechonias and his brethren. For there were many of the kings who had brothers, but it never speaks or makes mention of the brothers.

And one should say, according to Ambrose, that wherever mention is made of brothers, as when it says, Judas and his brethren, and Phares and Zara of Thamar, this indicates that they were equal in sanctity or wickedness. Now, these three were wicked.

In another way, one can say that it is because each of these brothers reigned, as is clear from what has been said, but this was not the case with the brothers of the other kings.

79. Third, there is a question concerning what is said about the deportation. It seems to be false, because Josias was never deported.

And one should say that this should be taken according to God’s foreknowledge, according to which it had been ordained that those who were begotten at that time should be deported. Or, one should say that after the transmigration is the same as near the deportation, or with the deportation already drawing near.

Babylonian exile to Christ

1:12 And after the transmigration of Babylon, Jechonias begot Salathiel. And Salathiel begot Zorobabel. [n. 80]

1:13 And Zorobabel begot Abiud. And Abiud begot Eliacim. And Eliacim begot Azor. [n. 84]

1:14 And Azor begot Sadoc. And Sadoc begot Achim. And Achim begot Eliud. [n. 85]

1:15 And Eliud begot Eleazar. And Eleazar begot Mathan. And Mathan begot Jacob. [n. 86]

1:16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. [n. 92]

1:17 So all the generations, from Abraham to David, are fourteen generations. And from David to the transmigration of Babylon are fourteen generations: and from the transmigration of Babylon to Christ are fourteen generations. [n. 98]

1:18 But the generation of Christ was thus: when his mother, Mary, was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Spirit. [n. 102]

1:19 Whereupon Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to expose her publicly, wanted to put her away privately. [n. 114]

1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold the angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take unto you Mary your wife, for he who is born in her, is of the Holy Spirit. [n. 119]

1:21 And she will bring forth a son: and you will call his name Jesus. For he will save his people from their sins. [n. 134]

80. Here he sets out the third fourteen of Christ’s generation, which proceeds through private persons.

As was said above, there are two opinions about this man Jechonias. For Jerome and Ambrose would have it that there is one man who is placed in the end of the first fourteen and is called Joakim, and another who is called Joachim. According to Augustine, however, see above.

For the transmigration of the sons of Israel signifies the transfer of the faith to the gentiles; to you it behoved us first to speak the word of God (Acts 13:46). In the transmigration there happened so to speak a certain return of the Jews to the gentiles. Hence it was established as a certain corner, so to speak; and for this reason, this man Jechonias signifies Christ, who was made the cornerstone, joining in himself both peoples, the Jews and the gentiles; the stone which the builders rejected; the same is become the head of the corner (Ps 117:22).

81. But there is a question here: write this man, Sedecias, barren, a man that will not prosper in his days: for there will not be a man of his seed that will sit upon the throne of David (Jer 22:30). So how is Christ said to have descended from David through Sedecias, since it is written of Christ: he will sit upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom? (Isa 9:2)

And one should say, according to Ambrose, that since Christ is said to sit above the throne, this is understood as concerning a spiritual kingdom, not a corporeal one, except insofar as the spiritual is signified through the corporeal kingdom of David.

82. And Salathiel begot Zorobabel. On the contrary: it is said that the sons of Jechonias were Asir, Salathiel, and Melchiram, and Phadaia (1 Chr 3:17). And Phadaia had sons, Zorobabel and Semei; but of Abiud no mention is made at all. So it seems that the Evangelist speaks badly, saying that Salathiel begot Zorobabel, and that Zorobabel begot Abiud.

The Gloss responds to this in three ways. One response is that in the book of Chronicles many things are corrupted by the fault of the scribes, and principally in those things which pertain to numbers and names. Hence the Apostle forbids any attention being given to those corrupted generations, which bring in more questions than usefulness (1 Tim 1:4).

There is another response, that Salathiel had two names; for he was called Salathiel and Caphadara; and hence the book of Chronicles calls Zorobabel the son of Capha, and the Evangelist calls him the son of Salathiel. Therefore there is no contrariety.

There is a third response, and a truer one, that Salathiel and Caphadara were brothers, as is said in the book of Chronicles. Now, Caphadara begot a son whom he named by the same name, i.e., Zorobabel, and this man begot Abiud. It should also be said that the Book of Chronicles tells the genealogy of this Capha; the Evangelist tells the generation of Salathiel, because Christ was to be born from him.

83. Now it should be noted that no mention is made in the books of Sacred Scripture of those who were from Abiud to Joseph, but they were taken from the annals of the Hebrews, which for the most part Herod burned to hide the ignobility of his own ancestry. The meaning of the letter is clear here.

84. Let us pursue the mystical sense.

Note then that in this part of the genealogy three orders are placed. The first is the order of teachers, and it contains four generations.

For preparation is required before prayer: before prayer prepare your soul (Sir 18:23); and hence from Jechonias, who is interpreted as ‘the preparation of the Lord’, comes Salathiel, who is interpreted as ‘my prayer’; and he indicates Christ, who in all things was heard because of his reverence (Heb 5:7).

Now prayer ought to precede teaching: and pray for me, that speech may be given me, that I may open my mouth with confidence (Eph 6:19); and so Salathiel is followed by Zorobabel, who is interpreted ‘the teacher of Babel’, i.e., ‘of confusion’; because through the doctrine and preaching of the apostles the nations were called back to the true God, and this was to the confusion of idolatry; and this belongs principally to Christ, who says: you call me Master, and Lord; and you say well, for so I am (John 13:13).

Further, through teaching and preaching a man acquires the dignity of a father; hence they are called fathers of those who are spiritually instructed: for if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the Gospel, we are sons (1 Cor 4:15). And so there follows Zorobabel begot Abiud, who is interpreted as ‘my father’; and this belongs to Christ; he will cry out to me: you are my father (Ps 88:27).

85. And Abiud begot Eliacim. Here the order of beginners, i.e., of listeners, is indicated.

Now the first thing which comes about in the listener through preaching, and that at which the preacher should aim, is that he rise again from vices to virtues: rise you who sleep (Eph 5:14); and so Abiud begot Eliacim, who is interpreted as ‘the resurrection’; and this belongs to Christ, who says, he who believes in me, has everlasting life (John 6:47).

Now, the one rising again cannot attain to the state of justice except through the help of God; and therefore, after he has risen, a man needs the help of God: my help is from the Lord (Ps 120:2); and so there follows Eliacim begot Azor, who is interpreted as ‘one helped’. And this also belongs to Christ, of whom it is said: be my helper . . . O God my Savior (Ps 26:9). And through this help one comes to justice; hence Azor begot Sadoc, who is interpreted as ‘the just’; the justice of God, by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all and upon all them that believe in him (Rom 3:22).

Further, the consummation of justice, or the end, is charity: the end of justice is Christ; the end of the commandment is charity (1 Tim 1:5). There are only two commandments, namely the love of God and the love of neighbor; and this commandment we have from God, that he, who loves God, love also his brother (1 John 4:21). And therefore Sadoc is followed by Achim, and Achim by Eliud. Achim is interpreted as ‘my brother’; hence he signifies love of neighbor; behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell in unity (Ps 132:1). This belongs to Christ, who is our flesh and our brother. And because love of neighbor cannot be without love of God, there follows Achim begot Eliud. Eliud is interpreted as ‘my God’; I will love you, O Lord (Ps 17:2); and this belongs to Christ: you are my God (Ps 30:15).

86. Eliud begot Eleazar. Here the order of proficients is indicated.

Now, one cannot advance without the help of God; hence the first thing required for advancing is the help of God; and so Eliud is rightly followed by Eleazar, who is interpreted ‘God my helper’; blessed is the man whose help is from you (Ps 83:6). But since God can help one toward health in many ways, as by removing obstacles and providing occasions, the most powerful of helps is through the gift of his grace; but by the grace of God, I am what I am (1 Cor 15:10). And so Eleazar, i.e., the help of God, is followed by Mathan, who is interpreted as ‘gift’, namely the gift of divine grace; and this belongs to Christ, who is also one who gives; for God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son (John 3:16); he gave gifts to men (Eph 4:8). But because a man can have so much confidence in the gift of grace that he falls into negligence, by not cooperating with grace through free judgment, there follows Jacob, who is interpreted as ‘wrestler’; on account of this it is said: but by the grace of God, I am what I am, and then follows, his grace in me has not been void (1 Cor 15:10); and we helping do exhort you, that you receive not the grace of God in vain (2 Cor 6:1). Further, there now follows Joseph, i.e., ‘increase’, because a man comes to increase through grace and the effort of the free judgment; but the path of the just, as a shining light, goes forwards and increases even to perfect day (Prov 4:18). Hence Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary.

87. But here there arises a twofold question. For first, there is a question about a seeming contrariety between Luke and Matthew; for Luke says that Joseph was of Heli, who was of Mathat (Luke 3:23); but Matthew says that he was of Jacob; so there seems to be a contrariety between them.

But to this it should be said that there were two of the same root, but not of the same family, namely Mathan and Mathat. For they were from the root of David, but one descended from the root of David through Solomon, namely Mathan; the other descended through Nathan, namely Mathat. So Mathan took a wife by the name of Hesta, out of whom he begot Jacob; Mathan having died, since the law did not prohibit a widow from marrying, she married his cousin Mathat, who begot Heli from her. Hence Jacob and Heli were brothers from the same mother, but not from the same father. Now, Heli took a wife, and died without children; hence Jacob, that he might raise up seed for his brother, took the same wife, and begot Joseph. Hence Joseph was the son of Jacob according to the flesh, but the son of Heli according to adoption. And so Matthew, who places in the genealogy of Christ only the fathers according to the flesh, says that Joseph was the son of Jacob; but Luke, who places many in the genealogy who were not fathers according to the flesh, says that he was the son of Heli. The reason for this difference was stated above.

88. But it should be noted that when a brother took the wife of his brother to sustain his name, it should not be taken in such a way that the son who was begotten would be called by the name of the dead brother; for Booz who took Ruth, that he might raise up seed for Elimelech, begot a son who was not called Elimelech, but Obed; but he is said to sustain his name to this extent, that the son is attributed to him according to law. Nor is this unfitting, because, as is said in Church History, the apostles and evangelists themselves were taught by the immediate parents of Christ about the genealogy of Christ, who held it in their hearts partly by memory, and partly from the aforementioned books of the Chronicles.

89. The second question is this: Matthew intended to write down the generation of Christ. So since Christ was not the son of Joseph, but only of Mary, why was it necessary to trace the generation of Christ from Abraham to Joseph?

To which it should be said that it was the custom among the Jews, and is so even today, to take a wife from one’s own tribe, hence it is said that all men will marry wives of their own tribe and kindred (Num 36:7). And although this was not observed out of necessity, still it was observed by custom. Hence Joseph took Mary his wife as the one closest to himself. And so, since they were of the same stock, from the fact that Joseph is shown to have descended from David, Mary and Christ are shown to have been of the seed of David as well.

90. But how can it be known that Joseph and Mary were of the same tribe? It is clear from what is said in Luke, because when there was to be an enrollment, Joseph and Mary went up into the city of David, which is Bethlehem (Luke 2:4). Hence by fact that he brought her with him, it is clear that they were of the same family.

91. But it is asked why he did not show the generation of Christ from David through Mary.

It should be said that it is not the custom among the Hebrews, nor even among the gentiles, to put together a genealogy through women; hence Christ, who had come for the salvation of man, wished in this to imitate or observe the customs of men; and so his genealogy is not traced through women, especially since his genealogy can be known through men without risk to the truth.

92. The husband of Mary. Jerome: when you hear ‘husband’, let not a suspicion of nuptials arise.

What then should be said? This statement of Jerome’s is understood as regarding the completion of marriage, which is bodily union. Now, he is named the husband of Mary, as Augustine says, that the marriage might be shown to be between those continuing in a mutual vow.

93. But how was there a marriage? For a vow impedes the contracting of matrimony and breaks off the thing contracted. Since therefore the Blessed Virgin vowed virginity, it seems that there would have been no marriage.

But one should say that the Blessed Virgin was hard pressed between two things: for on the one hand she was pressed by the curse of the law, to which the infertile woman was subject; on the other hand, she was pressed by the plan of serving chastity; and so she planned on virginity, unless the Lord should arrange otherwise; hence she entrusted herself to the divine arrangement.

To what is said, that she consented to a bodily union, one should say that she did not; she consented to marriage directly, but to a bodily union implicitly, so to speak, if God should will it.

94. Of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Here two errors are excluded. One, which says that Christ was the son of Joseph; and this is excluded by the fact that it says de qua. For if he had been the son of Joseph, it would have said de quo, or at least de quibus.

The other error is also excluded, namely the error of Valentinus, who said that Christ did not take up a body from the Blessed Virgin, but rather brought a body down from heaven, and passed through the Blessed Virgin as through a canal. Against this is what is said here, of whom. For if it were as he says, the Evangelist would not have said of whom, but through whom, or by whom, or out of whom, or something like this. For this preposition ‘of’ always specifies consubstantiality; but not this preposition ‘out of’; hence one can say, out of the morning comes the day, and that the box proceeds out of the builder; but one never says of the builder. Hence by that fact that he says of, he specifies that the body of Christ was formed of the body of the Blessed Virgin; God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law (Gal 4:4).

95. Here one must beware the error of Nestorius, who placed two persons in Christ, and so did not admit that God was born, or suffered; nor did he attribute to a man the other things which belong to God, such as to be eternal, or to have created the stars. Hence in a certain letter of his he takes this Scriptural text as a confirmation of his own error: of whom was born Jesus, it does not say God, but Jesus, which is the name of a man, and Christ.

But according to this there would be no union in Christ, nor would Christ be called one.

96. Hence note that in Christ, since there came about a union of two natures in one person, there also came about a communication of idioms, so that those things which belong to God are attributed to a man, and vice versa. And whatever example can be taken from two accidents in one subject: a fruit is called white and tasty; and it is called white with regard to the tasty, for the reason that the fruit is white, and vice versa.

97. Who is called Christ. Note: he is called Christ simply, with nothing added, to mark that he is anointed with an invisible oil, not with a material oil as were the kings or the prophets in the law. God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows (Ps 44:8).

98. So all the generations. The generation of Christ having been set down, here he concludes the number of the generations; and he divides them into three fourteens.

The first fourteen is from Abraham to David, inclusively, I mean so that David is included in the first fourteen; and so this is all the generations. The second fourteen is extended from David exclusively, I mean so that David is not numbered, but rather it begins from Solomon, and ends at the transmigration of Babylon; and this is and from David to the transmigration of Babylon. The third begins from the transmigration of Babylon and ends in Christ, so that Christ is the fourteenth.

99. But it is asked why the Evangelist so diligently and attentively distinguished the generation of Christ into three fourteens.

Chrysostom gives a reason: because in these three fourteens some change always happens in the people of Israel. For in the first fourteen they were under leaders; in the second, under the kings; in the third, under the high priests; for the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king (Isa 33:22). And it says about his priesthood: you are a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech (Ps 109:4).

He gives another reason, namely to show the necessity of the coming of Christ. For in the first fourteen they asked for a king against the will of God, and went against the law. Moreover, in the second fourteen they were led into captivity. But in the third we were liberated from all guilt, and misery, and from the spiritual servitude of sin through Christ.

Jerome gives a third reason, that through these three fourteens are indicated three times in which the life of all men is led. For the time before the law is signified by the first fourteen, because some fathers who were before the law are placed in it; the time under the law is indicated by the second fourteen, because all those who are put there are under the law; and the time of grace is indicated by the third fourteen, because it ends at Christ, through whom came grace and truth (John 1:17).

100. This distinction also fits together with a mystery, because fourteen is a number composed out of four and ten. So by ten the Old Testament is understood, which was given in ten commandments. And by four is understood the Gospel, which is distinguished into four books. Moreover, the three fourteens indicate the faith of the Trinity. Hence by the fact that Matthew divides the genealogy into three fourteens, he indicates that through the New and the Old Testament we come to Christ in the faith of the Trinity.

101. Now there are three opinions about the number of the generations. For according to Jerome, who says that the Jechonias at the end of the first fourteen and the Jechonias in the beginning of the second are different, there are forty-two generations; for three fourteens makes that many. But according to Augustine there are only forty-one; and Christ himself is the one.

And this harmonizes with a mystery. For the number forty arises from four led into ten, and vice versa. Now, according to the Platonists, four is the number of the body, for the body is composed of four elements; but ten is the number which arises from the addition of the linear numbers: for one, two, three, and four make ten. And because he intended to explain how Christ descended linearly to us, he came to Christ through forty generations. But Luke, who intended to set forth the priestly dignity, to which pertains the expiation of sins below: I do not say to you, till seven times; but till seventy times seven times (Matt 18:22), sets down seventy-seven generations; for this number arises from seven led into eleven, for seven elevens are seventy-seven. So through eleven the breaking of the ten commandments is understood, and through seven the sevenfold grace, through which comes the remission of sins.

But that there are forty-two generations according to Jerome does not lack a mystery either, because through those two the two precepts of charity are understood; or the two Testaments, the Old and the New.

102. But the generation of Christ was thus. Having set down the genealogy of Christ in general, here he describes his generation in particular. And it is divided into three parts.

First, he sets down a certain title;

second, the Evangelist describes the manner of the generation, at when his mother, Mary, was espoused to Joseph;

third, he confirms the manner of the generation, at whereupon Joseph her husband.

103. So he says, but the generation of Christ was thus. This is read in two ways. For according to Chrysostom it is as it were a certain prologue to what will be said; but according to Remigius it is a certain epilogue to what was said before. In the first way, it is read thus: this was recounted about the genealogy of Christ, how Abraham begot Isaac through bodily mingling, but the generation of Christ was thus, supply: as will be said in what follows. In the second way, it is read so as to be an epilogue to what comes before: Abraham, and in this way until Christ. Now the generation of Christ was thus, supply: so as to extend from Abraham through David to Christ.

104. Next, he describes the manner of the generation;

and first he describes the person generating, when he says, when as his mother Mary was espoused;

second, he describes the very generation of Christ, when he says, before they came together, she was found with child;

third, he describes the author of the generation, of the Holy Spirit.

He describes the person generating by three things.

First, by condition, when he says, espoused to Joseph;

second, by dignity, his mother;

third, by proper name, Mary.

105. He says then, when as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph.

But here a question arises at once. Since Christ wished to be born of a virgin, why did he wish his mother to be espoused?

According to Jerome, three reasons are given. The first is so that the testimony of her virginity might be believable. For if she had not been espoused, and had said that she was a virgin while she was pregnant, she would seem to say this for no other reason than to hide the crime of adultery. But since she had been espoused, she had no need to lie. And therefore it would be more worthy of belief from her; your testimonies are become exceedingly credible (Ps 92:5). Another reason is so that she would have the protection of a man, both when she fled into Egypt and when she returned from there. The third was so that his birth would be hidden from the devil, lest he should impede Christ’s passion and the fruit of our redemption if he knew; for if they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory (1 Cor 2:8); this is interpreted as concerning the demon, i.e., he would not have permitted Christ to be crucified.

106. On the contrary, did not the devil know whether she was a virgin? For her virginity in her body was not corrupted. So the devil could know that she was a virgin.

But one should say, according to Ambrose, who also gives this reason, that some things are possible to the devil by the subtility of his nature which nevertheless are only possible by divine permission. Hence the devil would have known her virginity, if he had not been divinely restrained from diligent examination.

According to Ambrose, three reasons are given. The first is for the sake of the honor of the Lord’s mother, which had to be preserved; the Lord preferred that men have doubts about his own origin rather than about the chastity of his mother. And so he wished her to be espoused, so that the suspicion of adultery would be taken away, for he came to fulfill the law, not to destroy it; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill (Matt 5:17); honor your father and your mother (Exod 20:12). Another reason is so that, once her virginity was recorded, an excuse would be taken away from the adulterer; for if the mother of the Lord had not been espoused, and yet was pregnant, they could in a similar manner excuse themselves through her. Incline not my heart to evil words; to make excuses in sins (Ps 140:4). The third reason is because Christ espoused to himself the Church, which is a virgin; for I have espoused you to one husband that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ (2 Cor 11:2). And so he wished to be born of an espoused virgin as a sign that he espoused the Church to himself.

107. When his mother, Mary, was espoused. To whom? To Joseph.

According to Chrysostom, Joseph was a craftsman, a carpenter; and he signifies Christ, who through the wood of the cross restored all things, heavenly.

108. His mother, i.e., God’s mother. Here her dignity is shown, for it is not permitted to any creature, neither man nor angel, that he should be the father or the mother of God, but this was a privilege of singular grace, that she should become the mother not only of a man, but of God; and so it is said, a woman clothed with the sun (Rev 12:1), as though entirely filled with divinity. Nestorius denied this, because the divinity was not taken from the Virgin. Against which Ignatius Martyr used a beautiful example to show that she was the mother of God. It is agreed, he said, that in the generation of common men the woman is called the mother; and yet the mother does not give the rational soul, which is from God, but rather supplies the substance for the formation of the body. So in this way the woman is called the mother of the whole man because that which is taken from her is united to the rational soul. Similarly, since the humanity of Christ was taken from the Blessed Virgin, the Blessed Virgin is called the mother not only of a man, but also of God, on account of the union with the divinity, although the divinity is not taken from her, just as the rational soul is not taken from the mother in others.

109. Mary, her proper name. It is interpreted as ‘star of the sea’, or ‘illuminatrix’, and by her own language ‘Lady’, whence in Rev 12:1 a moon is described as under her feet.

110. Before they came together.

Here Helvidius objected: if this was before they came together, then at sometime they came together. Hence he denied the virginity of Christ’s mother; not before the birth, nor during the birth, but after the birth he says that she was known by a man.

And Jerome responds that, without a doubt, this before which is said here always brings in an order to the future. But this can be in either of two ways: either according to ratio, or according to the intellect’s reception. For if it be said, before I was eating in the port of Rome, I sailed to Africa, it should not be understood that after I sailed to Africa I ate; but that I had proposed to eat, and being prevented by the sailing I did not eat. And so it is here. It should not be understood in this way, that afterward they really came together, as that impious man says; but that by the very fact that she was espoused to him according to common opinion, it was lawful for them to come together, although they never did come together.

Remigius explains it in another way, so that it is understood of the solemn celebration of nuptials; for beforehand she was and remained for some days espoused, and meanwhile the spouse was not under the man’s care; but after the solemn celebration of the nuptials happened, then she was led to the man’s home. It is of these nuptials that the Evangelist speaks here. And according to this the objection of Helvidius has no place.

She was found with child. Notice the character of the word: for that is properly called ‘found’ about which one neither hopes nor supposes; and Joseph had only an opinion about the chastity of Mary, because, contrary to his expectation, it happened that he found her pregnant.

111. She was found with child, supply by Joseph himself, who, as Jerome says, with marital freedom was searching out almost all her secrets. Of the Holy Spirit. Here the Author of the conception is touched upon.

Now, this should be read separately from that which comes before. For it should not be read or understood that Joseph found her with child of the Holy Spirit, but only that he found her pregnant. And lest there arise meanwhile in the hearers a suspicion of adultery, he added of the Holy Spirit, i.e., of the power of the Holy Spirit, not of the substance, nor should he be thought to be the son of the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you (Luke 1:35).

112. Now, although according to St. Augustine the works of the Trinity are indivisible, and not only the Holy Spirit brought about the conception, but the Father and the Son as well, nevertheless it is attributed to the Holy Spirit by a certain appropriation. And this is for three reasons. The first reason is that the Holy Spirit is love: and this is a sign of the greatest love, that God willed that his own Son should be incarnated; for God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son (John 3:16). Second, because grace is attributed to the Holy Spirit; now there are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit (1 Cor 12:4); and this was the greatest grace. The third reason is given in the acts of the Nicene Council, and is that there are two words in us: that of the heart, and that of the voice. The word of the heart is the very concept of the intellect, which is hidden to men, except insofar as it is expressed through the voice, or through the word of the voice. Now, the word of the heart is compared to the eternal Word before the incarnation, when he was with the Father and hidden to us; but the word of the voice is compared to the incarnate Word which then appeared to us and was manifest. But the word of the heart is not joined to the word of the voice except by the mediation of the spirit; and therefore the incarnation of the Word, through which he appeared visibly to us, is rightly done by the mediation of the Spirit.

113. Note here four reasons why Christ wished to be born of a virgin. The first of the four was that original sin is contracted in a child from the mingling of a man and a woman; hence if Christ had been born of the conjugal act, he would have contracted original sin. But this would be unfitting, since he had come into the world to take away our sins; hence he should not have been infected by the touch of sin.

Second, because Christ was a particular teacher of chastity; below: there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven (Matt 19:12).

Third, on account of purity and modesty. For wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subject to sins (Wis 1:4). Hence it was proper that the womb of his mother be polluted by no corruption.

Fourth, on account of the special character of the Word; because just as the Word comes forth from the heart without corruption of the heart, so Christ wished to be born of a virgin without corruption of the virgin.

114. Whereupon Joseph her husband, being a just man. Having set out the mode of the generation, here he confirms it by testimony. For since the Evangelist had said above that the mother of Jesus was found with child, and that this was of the Holy Spirit, someone could think that the Evangelist had set this to favor his Teacher; so the Evangelist confirms here the manner of generation mentioned before.

And first, by a prophetic foretelling, now all this was done (Matt 1:22);

second, by the angelic revelation, at, and Joseph rising up from sleep (Matt 1:24).

In the first part, there are three things.

First, the person to whom the revelation was made is introduced;

second, the person revealing is introduced, at, but while he thought on these things, behold the angel of the Lord appeared to him;

third, the words of the revelation are set out, at Joseph, son of David.

115. Now the person to whom the revelation was made is commended by two things, namely by the fact that he is just, and therefore would not lie; second by the fact that he is the spouse, or husband, and therefore would not suffer a crime in her; the jealousy and rage of the husband will not spare in the day of revenge (Prov 6:34).

So he speaks in this way: she was found by Joseph, to be with child, but Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to expose her publicly.

Here there are two opinions of the saints, namely that of Ambrose and that of Augustine.

116. For Augustine would have it that Joseph, who was not present when the angelic announcement was made, returning and finding her pregnant, had a suspicion of adultery.

But then right away a question arises: how was he just, if he did not wish to hand over her whom he suspected of adultery, i.e., to make her crime known? For by this he seemed to consent to her sin, and it is said that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do it, but they also that consent to them that do (Rom 1:32).

But there are three responses to this. The first is, following Chrysostom, that justice is twofold: for there is one justice which is a cardinal virtue, which is called special justice; another is legal justice, which includes all virtues: piety, and mercy, and such. So when it is said that Joseph was just, this should be understood of justice in general, as justice is taken for piety. Hence since he was just, i.e., pious, he did not wish to hand her over. Another response is that of Augustine, who says that sin is twofold, namely hidden sin and manifest sin; for hidden sin should not be publicly disclosed, but a remedy should be applied to it in some other way. So the suspicion of adultery which Joseph had was a suspicion of a hidden sin, and not of a manifest one, because he alone knew; and again, if others were to know that she was pregnant, they could only suppose that it was from him. And therefore her crime ought not to have been made known. The third response is that of Rabanus, that Joseph was both just and pious, for by the fact that he did not wish to make her crime known, he was pious, but by the fact that he wished to send her away, he appeared just; for he knew that he who keeps an adulteress, is foolish and wicked (Prov 18:22).

117. But according to Jerome and Origen, he had no suspicion of adultery. For Joseph knew Mary’s chastity; he had read in the Scriptures that a virgin will conceive (Isa 7:14), and, and there will come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower will rise up out of his root (Isa 11:1); he also knew that Mary was descended from David. Hence he more easily believed that this had been fulfilled in her than that she had fornicated. And therefore, considering himself unworthy to live with such great sanctity, he wished to hide her away, just as Peter said, depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord (Luke 5:8). Hence he did not wish to hand her over, i.e., to take her to himself, and receive her in marriage, considering himself unworthy.

Or according to the opinion of others, not knowing the end, lest he be held accountable if he were to conceal it, and keep her with himself.

118. But while he thought on these things. Here he introduces the person revealing. And he touches upon three things.

For first, he touches upon the time;

second, the person revealing is introduced, behold the angel of the Lord;

third, the mode of the revelation is expressed, appeared to him in his sleep.

119. So he says, but while he thought on these things, i.e., while he turned these things over in his mind, behold the angel of the Lord appeared.

Notice that two things are commended here about Joseph, namely wisdom and mercy. Wisdom indeed in the fact that he deliberated before he acted; let your eyes look straight on, and let your eyelids go before your steps (Prov 4:25): this means, do nothing without the judgment and deliberation of reason. Similarly, mercy or piety in the fact that he did not make known or proclaim her deed, as opposed to many men who want to announce immediately that which they have in their heart; as a city that lies open and is not compassed with walls, so is a man that cannot refrain his own spirit in speaking (Prov 25:28).

And therefore he deserved to be instructed, or consoled.

120. Hence follows behold the angel of the Lord appeared, the help of God being, so to speak, ready at hand; and the Lord is become . . . a helper in due time in tribulation (Ps 9:10); for behold God is my helper: and the Lord is the protector of my soul (Ps 53:6).

The angel of the Lord, for none could better excuse her than he who was aware of her protected virginity. Hence that same angel who was sent to Mary (Luke 1:26), is believed to have been sent to Joseph; the angel of the Lord will encamp round about them (Ps 33:8), namely Mary and Joseph, so as to rescue her from infamy, and so as not to abandon Joseph in turmoil.

121. But here it is asked why a revelation was not made to Joseph from the beginning, before he was disturbed in this way.

Similarly, why did not Mary reveal to him the angelic announcement which had been made to her?

And to the first, one should say that this was done so that his testimony would be more believable. For as the Lord permitted the apostle Thomas to doubt his resurrection, so that he might touch, and touching, believe, and by believing he might remove the wound of unbelief in us; in the same way the Lord permitted Joseph to doubt the chastity of Mary so that, doubting, he might receive the angelic revelation, and by receiving it believe more firmly.

To the second question it should be said that if Mary had spoken to him, he would not have believed her.

122. Appeared to him in his sleep: behold, the mode of revelation.

Note that to appear is proper to that which of its own nature is invisible, yet has it within its power that it be seen, as is God, or an angel; for those things which have it of their own nature that they are seen are not properly said to appear. Hence it is called a divine apparition, or an angelic apparition. Hence this is properly spoken.

123. Appeared to him in his sleep.

But here it is asked, why in his sleep?

And a reason is given in the Gloss, namely that Joseph was in a certain way doubting; hence he was in a certain way sleeping, so to speak, and therefore rightly is the angel said to have appeared to him in his sleep.

Another and better reason can be given, for as the Apostle says, tongues are for a sign, not to believers, but to unbelievers; but prophecies not to unbelievers, but to believers (1 Cor 14:22). Now a revelation, which is called a prophecy, properly happens in sleep; if there be among you a prophet of the Lord, I will appear to him in a vision, or I will speak to him in a dream (Num 12:6); and so since Joseph was just and faithful, there should have come to him, as to one who is faithful, an apparition, as befits those who believe; that is, a prophetic revelation, as it were. Since indeed a bodily apparition is miraculous, such an apparition did not befit him, since he believed, and was faithful.

124. But then it is asked why a visible apparition was made to Mary, since she was most faithful.

And one should say that the mystery of the incarnation was revealed to the Virgin Mary in the beginning, when it was most difficult to believe; and so it was necessary that a visible apparition be made to her. However, it was not revealed to Joseph in the beginning, but rather when it was for the most part completed already, since he already saw her womb to have grown big; hence he was more easily able to believe, and so an apparition which came in his sleep was enough for him.

125. Joseph, son of David. Here the words of the revelation are set down; and it is divided into three parts, according to the three things which the angel does.

For first, he forbids the separation of Mary and Joseph;

second, he opens the mystery of the incarnation, when he says, he who is born in her, is of the Holy Spirit;

third, he foretells the future service of Joseph himself, namely that which he showed to the child, at she will bring forth a son.

126. He says then, Joseph. He calls him so as to render him attentive for listening, and so as to recall him to himself. This is common in the Scriptures, namely that when an apparition is sent which is from someone higher, he seeks in the hearer a certain elevation of the mind, and attention; son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak to you (Ezek 2:1). And below that, but you, O son of man, hear all that I say to you: and do not provoke me. And: I will stand upon my watch, and fix my foot upon the tower: and I will watch, to see what will be said to me (Hab 2:1).

127. Son of David. He pronounced the name of the family so that he might ward off that which is said: hear therefore, O house of David: is it a small thing for you to be grievous to men, that you are grievous to my God also? (Isa 7:13). For the sign was given not to one person, but to an entire tribe or house; hence because he was supposed to instruct him about this, Joseph is commanded by the pronunciation of his family name to recall to remember the prophet’s saying.

128. Do not fear. Every apparition, whether it be of a good angel or a bad one, instills a certain fear; and this is because such an apparition is against the custom and outside the nature of man, so to speak, and so it places a man outside of himself, so to speak. But there is this difference, that the apparition of a bad angel instills terror, and leaves a man in that terror, namely to draw the man placed as it were outside of himself more easily to sin; but in the apparition of a good angel, although it instills terror, yet at once an end of the terror is given, and a gain in consolation, namely that the man might be led back into himself, and attend to what is said to him. Hence in Luke, where it says that an angel appeared to Zachary, there follows at once, do not fear, Zachary, and likewise in the same chapter, do not fear, Mary (Luke 1:13, 30).

129. Hence after the apparition Joseph is given consolation at once. He had a twofold fear, namely of God and also of sin, that is, he feared lest he should sin by living with Mary as if co-aware of sin, and so next is added fear not, namely with a dread of sin, to take unto you Mary your wife.

Note that wife is said, not on account of matrimony, but on account of espousal; for it is the custom of Scripture both to call the espoused married, and the married espoused.

130. But it is asked, how he could command Joseph to take her, since he had not sent her away?

And one should say that although he had not sent her away bodily, nevertheless he had sent her away in his soul; and therefore he is commanded to take her. Or do not fear to take her as regards the solemnity and the celebration of nuptials.

131. For he who is born in her, is of the Holy Spirit. Here he opens the mystery of the incarnation.

And notice that since three things were there, namely the Virgin conceiving, the Son of God conceived, and the active power of the Holy Spirit, the angel expressed two of them well, namely the one conceiving and the author of the conception; but the third, the Son of God conceived, he only expresses indefinitely: for he who, he says, is born in her, and this is done to indicate that he is ineffable and incomprehensible, not only to men, but even to the angels. He who, he says, is born in her, he does not say, of her, because to be born of a mother is to advance into the light, while to be born in a mother is to be conceived, is of the Holy Spirit.

So this is the angelic testimony which the Evangelist brings in to confirm what he had said, that she was found with child, of the Holy Spirit.

132. Note that in the conception of other women, the formative power is in the seed of the man, the subject of which power is the seed, and through this power the fetus is formed and enlivened in the body of the woman. But the Holy Spirit supplied this. And for this reason the saints are sometimes found to say that the Holy Spirit was there instead of seed, while sometimes they say that no seed was there. And this is because there are two things in the seed of a man, namely the corrupted substance which comes down from the body of the man, and the formative power itself.

It should be said therefore that the Holy Spirit was instead of seed as regards the formative power; but he was not there instead of seed as regards bodily substance, because neither the flesh of Christ nor his conception was made from the substance of the Holy Spirit. And so it is clear that the Holy Spirit cannot be called the father of Christ, because he is a father neither according to the divine nature, nor according to the human. Indeed, not according to the divine nature, because although Christ is of the same glory with the Holy Spirit, yet the Son according to the divine nature takes nothing from the Holy Spirit, and so cannot be called his son, for a son takes something from the father. Likewise not according to the human, because father and son ought to agree in substance; but although Christ was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, nevertheless he is not of the substance of the Holy Spirit.

133. But against what is said, is of the Holy Spirit, it is said that Wisdom has built herself a house (Prov 9:1). So it seems that the Divine Wisdom itself, i.e., the Son of God, united himself to human nature, and thus is not made by the power of the Holy Spirit.

But there are two responses, according to Augustine. First, that what is written in Proverbs 9:1 is understood of the Church, which Christ founded in his own blood. Another is that the works of the Trinity are indivisible, and therefore what the Son does, the Holy Spirit does also, and yet this action is attributed to the Holy Spirit by a certain appropriation. And the reason for this was stated above.

134. She will bring forth a son. Here he foretells the service which Joseph will show to the child when born, and he does three things:

for first, he foretells the Virgin’s labor;

second, he reveals beforehand the service which Joseph himself was to show the child when he says, and you will call his name;

third, he discloses the name given to the child, when he says Jesus.

135. He says then, she will bring forth. Thus indeed she conceived of the Holy Spirit at first, but she will bring forth. He does not say for you, because Joseph himself did not beget the child. it is said to Zachary: your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son (Luke 1:13), because Zachary himself begot him. Or he does not say for you to show that he was born for all: she will not bear a son only for you, or for this man, but for the whole world; behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, that will be to all the people: for, this day, is born to you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord, in the city of David (Luke 2:10).

136. But because Joseph could say, she conceived of the Holy Spirit in this way, and she will bear a son; what then is there for me? I am not necessary to her at all, he adds Joseph’s own service: you will call his name.

It was the custom among the Hebrews, and still is today, that they circumcised the child on the eighth day, and at that time gave him a name; and this was done by Joseph. So he was the agent in this work. Hence it is said to him, you will call; it is not said, you will give, because it is already given to him; you will be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord will name (Isa 62:2).

137. Jesus, this is the name given by God. And he gives the cause: for he will save his people; what he will acquire for himself by his own blood is his people. The people that will deny him will not be his (Dan 9:26); hence it is the people of the Lord through faith. But you are a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people (1 Pet 2:9).

From their sins. In the book of Judges it frequently says that such or such a one will save Israel: but from what? From bodily enemies in that case, but here from sins, by the forgiveness of sins, which belongs to God alone. But that you may know that the Son of man has power on earth to forgive sins (Luke 5:24).

138. Note that Nestorius is confounded here, who said that those things which are of God, as to be eternal, to be omnipotent, or so on, do not belong to this man. Behold, this same man, who was born of the Virgin, who is called Jesus, he will save his people from their sins. Hence, since no once can forgive sins but God alone, it is necessary to say that this man is God, and that those things which are of God most truly belong to him.

Isaiah’s prophecy

1:22 Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled what the Lord spoke by the Prophet, saying: [n. 139]

1:23 behold a virgin will be with child, and bring forth a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. [n. 140]

139. The Evangelist had set out before that the mother of God was found with child of the Holy Spirit, and above he confirmed this by the angelic revelation. Here he confirms it by the prophet’s foretelling it; hence he says, now all this was done that it might be fulfilled what the Lord spoke by the Prophet.

And it should be known that this little part can be brought in here in two ways. For Chrysostom would have it that the angel said all this and brought in the prophecy, too. And the reason is that he wished to show that it had been foretold from of old, lest it seem that he was suddenly foretelling something new; who makes now what is to come (Isa 48:3), according to another translation.

Others say, and I believe better, that these words, namely all this was done, are the Evangelist’s words. For the words of the angel are ended at for he will save his people from their sins (Matt 1:21). And the Evangelist brings them in for the sake of three things. First, to show that the Old Testament is about Christ; to him all the prophets give testimony, that by his name all receive remission of sins, who believe in him (Acts 10:43). Second, so that they might more easily believe Christ; for if you did believe Moses, you would perhaps believe me also; for he wrote of me (John 5:46). Third, to show the conformity of the Old and New Testaments; which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ (Col 2:17).

140. But that you may know what is contained in this prophecy, you should know that the angel announced three things. For first he said, for he who is born in her (Matt 1:20); second, she will bring forth a son (Matt 1:21); third, and you will call his name Jesus (Matt 1:21). These things are contained in the prophecy in order. And first he confirms what he says, ‘behold a virgin’; second, ‘will be with child’; third, ‘they will call his name’. Therefore it was of the Holy Spirit that she conceived while still a virgin. And this is what is said in the prophecy: behold a virgin will conceive (Isa 7:14); it will bud forth and blossom, and will rejoice with joy and praise (Isa 35:2). And similarly the ‘virgin will bring forth a son’, because her virginity was not harmed in any way by giving birth; and there will come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower will rise up out of his root (Isa 11:1). Christ is certainly the flower. Therefore in no way is her virginity harmed.

141. There follows ‘and they will call his name Emmanuel.’

But it is asked, why does not this agree with the angel’s words, by saying, and you will call his name Jesus?

One should say that this promise had been made to the Jews, who would have salvation from Christ’s coming. And Jesus is interpreted as ‘savior’, which is the same as ‘Emmanuel’, God with us.

For God is with us in four ways: through the assumption of nature, and the Word was made flesh (John 1:14); through the conformity of nature, and in habit found as a man (Phil 2:7); through bodily interaction, afterwards he was seen upon earth, and conversed with men (Bar 3:38); and through spiritual interaction, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world (Matt 28:20).

142. But one should ask, concerning the letter, why the Evangelist does not use the same words as the prophet, but rather uses the name Jesus.

But one should say that he spoke in the same spirit. Still, Jerome says that the Evangelist said, will be with child, because he was speaking of something already accomplished.

143. Similarly, one should ask why it says in Isaiah, his name will be called (Isa 7:14), while it says here, and they will call.

But Jerome says that it says here, they will call, because what the angel first named by announcing (Luke 2:21), the apostles afterwards named by preaching and magnifying. That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow (Phil 2:10).

144. Which is interpreted as, God with us. But it is asked, who added this interpretation of the prophecy God with us, the prophet or the Evangelist? And it seems that it was not the Evangelist, because he did not need this, since he wrote in Hebrew.

But one should say, in one way, that ‘Emmanuel’ is a composite name, so the Evangelist interpreted it even in Hebrew. Or one should say that the one who first translated this Gospel from Hebrew interpreted it.

145. And one should note that the Gloss says that there are three species of prophecy: namely that of predestination, that of foreknowledge, and that of threatening; and these differ.

For prophecy names a foretelling of those things which are distant, i.e., in the future; but there are some things in the future which only God does; some things which, although God does them, still they come about through us and through other creatures as well; further, there are some things which God in no way does, such as evil. The foretelling of those things which only God does is called the prophecy of predestination, such as the conception of the Virgin; hence behold a virgin will conceive (Isa 7:14) is a prophecy of predestination. But those things which come about by secondary causes can be considered in two ways. First, according as they are in the foreknowledge of God, e.g., concerning Lazarus; for if someone were to consider the natural causes, he would say that Lazarus would never rise, and he would speak truly; while nevertheless he was to be raised up according to the order of divine foreknowledge. Therefore, when a prophecy foretells according to what is in the divine foreknowledge, it is always fulfilled; but when it foretells according to inferior causes, it is not always fulfilled, as is clear when Isaiah said to Ezechias, take order with your house, for you will die, and not live (Isa 38:1).

146. But does not a prophecy of foreknowledge impose necessity?

And one should say that it does not, because a prophecy is a particular sign of God’s foreknowledge, which foreknowledge does not impose necessity on the things foreknown, because he considers future things in his own presentiality. For whatever is done is present to God, since his gaze extends to every time; for if I see something present, my gaze does not impose necessity, as when I see someone sitting. And we have understood the prophecies which are brought into this book in this way.

147. For one should consider that there have been three errors.

One is that of the Manichees, who say that no prophecies about Christ are found in the Old Testament; and whatever has been brought into the New Testament from the Old is wholly by corruption.

This is against what is said, Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God, which he had promised before, by his prophets, in the holy Scriptures (Rom 1:1–2). And what is said about the prophets of the Jews is clear below: whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ, according to the flesh (Rom 9:5).

148. Another error was that of Theodore of Mopsuestia, who says that none of those things which are brought in from the Old Testament are literally about Christ, but are made to fit, as when they bring in that line from Virgil:

he hung remembering such things, and remained pierced

For this is made to fit with Christ. And then that it might be fulfilled should be explained in this way, as though the Evangelist had said: and this can be made to fit.

But against this: that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me (Luke 24:44). And one should know that in the Old Testament there are certain things which are referred to Christ and are said only of him, as this line, behold a virgin will conceive, and bear a son (Isa 7:14); and this one: O God my God, look upon me: why have you forsaken me? (Ps 21:2). And if someone were to set down another literal sense, he would be a heretic, and heresy is accursed. But since not only the words of the Old Testament, but even its deeds signify things about Christ, sometimes some things are said literally about others, but are referred to Christ insofar as they bear a figure of Christ, as it is said about Solomon: and he will rule from sea to sea (Ps 71:8), for this was not fulfilled in him.

149. The third error is that of the Jews.

One should know that the Jews especially object to this Scriptural text, because in Hebrew there is not virgin, but alma, which is the same as young woman. Hence literally these things are not said of Christ, but of Emmanuel, or of a certain son of Isaiah, according to others.

Again, the Jews objected that this was given as a sign. Two kings came out against Achaz (Isa 7:3), and by giving this sign to Achaz the prophet promised that they would be freed from these kings.

But one should say that he gave this sign not only to Achaz, but also to the house of David, because he says, hear therefore, O house of David (Isa 7:13); as though the Prophet had said, the Lord will help you against this king, because he will do much greater things, since there will be not only the liberation of this man, but of the whole world.

150. But let us return to the text. Now all this was done.

But one should say in one way, according to Rabanus, that the phrase all this was done, is referred to the things done before: that the angel appeared to the Virgin, and said these words, all this was done, for the safekeeping of the Virgin, according as the that is taken causally. Or it is referred to those things which were foretold; and it can be called all done because of predestination.

Or one should say that the Evangelist wrote after it was all done, and so it refers to this. Hence the that is taken consecutively, because he would not have it that God was incarnated for the sake of fulfilling the prophecy, as though the Old Testament were more worthy than the New; but it followed upon the prophecy that Christ was incarnated.

Joseph’s dream

1:24 And Joseph rising up from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him, and took unto him his wife. [n. 152]

1:25 And he did not know her until she brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus. [n. 155]

151. Above, by two things, namely by the revelation of the angel, and by the prophet’s foretelling, the Evangelist confirmed that the mother of God conceived of the Holy Spirit; here he aims to show the same thing by Joseph’s obedience, who would not have assented to the angel’s command that he should take Mary as his wife unless he had known that she was impregnated of the Holy Spirit.

And concerning this he does two things:

first, he sets down her spouse’s obedience to the angel;

second, he describes the manner of the obedience, at and took.

152. And notice that since we fell into sin through the disobedience of the first man, for as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners (Rom 5:19), therefore obedience is put forward at the beginning of our renewal.

And we can note four things which are necessary for obedience. The first is that it be set in order. And I say set in order, because first vices should be given up, and afterwards one should obey unto the working of the virtues; break up anew your fallow ground, and sow not upon thorns (Jer 4:3). And so it says here that Joseph rising up from sleep, namely the sleep of laziness and unbelief. It is said about this sleep: rise you who sleep, and arise from the dead (Eph 5:14).

The second is that it ought to be prompt; and this is what it is said: delay not to be converted to the Lord, and defer it not from day to day (Sir 5:8). And so it says here that he immediately did as the angel commanded him. The Gloss: whoever is taught by the Lord, let him scatter the obstacles, rise from sleep, and do what is commanded.

The third, that it should be perfect, so that not only does what is commanded come about, but it comes about in the way in which it was commanded by the one who ordered these things. Hence it says here, as the angel of the Lord had commanded. The Gloss: perfect obedience. Children, obey your parents in all things (Col 3:20). The fourth, that it should be discerning, so that he is obeyed who should be obeyed, and in what he should be obeyed, so that nothing will come about against God; hence he says, as the angel of the Lord had commanded, not a bad angel but an angel of God. Dearly beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits if they be of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world (1 John 4:1).

153. And took. Here is shown in what things he obeyed. And three things are set down. First, the obedience which he showed to the angel; second, the reverence which he showed to the mother; third, the service which he gave to Christ after birth.

154. The angel commanded Joseph, do not fear to take unto you Mary your wife (Matt 1:20). And Joseph did as the angel of the Lord had commanded. It is clear here that he found the woman good.

But did he not have her in his house? So why does it say, rising . . . he took?

Chrysostom responds: because he had not thrown her from the house, but from his heart. Or because she was first betrothed, and afterwards the nuptials were to be celebrated, and at that point she is called, and is, a married person.

155. And lest someone should suspect that a bodily union came in the meanwhile, he adds, and he did not know her.

Here one should understand that this word ‘to know’ is taken in two ways in Sacred Scripture: sometimes for recognition, and from henceforth you will know him, and you have seen him (John 14:7); sometimes for bodily union: and Adam knew Eve his wife (Gen 4:1), that is, bodily.

156. But it is objected that because it does not say simply he did not know her but until she brought forth her firstborn son, therefore he knew her afterward; hence Helvidius also said: although a virgin conceived Christ, yet afterwards she had other sons by Joseph.

And so Jerome says that ‘until’ sometimes indicates something limited and determinate, as I say, I will not come until I eat, because I signify that I will come afterwards; sometimes it indicates something unlimited and indeterminate, for example: he must reign, until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25). Will he not reign afterwards? Yes indeed, but Scripture uses such a way of speaking because it aims to remove that which could be a doubt. For there could be a doubt as to whether he was reigning when his enemies had not been put under his feet. Similarly, since the Blessed Virgin had given birth, there could be a doubt as to whether she had been known by Joseph before the birth, because the first should never come into doubt by anyone; namely because the angels have sung, glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will (Luke 2:14). And so the Evangelist aimed at this.

And Jerome argued most well against Helvidius: you say, Helvidius, that Joseph did not know her before, because he had been warned in a dream by the angel. If therefore a warning in sleep was so strong that he did not join himself to Mary, how much more the knowledge of the angels, of the shepherds, and of the wise men?

157. But Chrysostom takes knowledge as intellectual recognition. He did not know her, that is, how great her dignity was; but after she bore the child he knew. Others say that it is taken as sensible recognition; and in a certain way the opinion of these men is probable enough. For they say that Moses had such a brightness on his face from the Lord’s speech that the children of Israel could not look at his face (2 Cor 3:7). So if Moses had this from close association with God, much more did the Blessed Virgin, who bore him in the womb, have such a brightness on her face that Joseph did not know her. But the first explanation is more literal.

158. Again, Helvidius says that the text says, until she brought forth her firstborn son. The firstborn is said with respect to what comes after. Therefore she had others.

Jerome responds that it is customary in Sacred Scripture that the one whom others do not precede is called the firstborn; Exodus says that the firstborn of the Jews were offered to the Lord (Exod 13:12). Jerome asks: was it necessary to think that they would not be offered until the second was born? Therefore those whom others do not precede are called the firstborn; and so it is understood here.

159. Then follows the service. Luke follows this up more completely (Luke 2:21), but Matthew touches upon it briefly. For so the Holy Spirit wished it to be, that those things which one has said, the other should touch upon.

He called his name Jesus; this name indeed was more than slightly famous and longed for among the ancients; I will look for your salvation, O Lord (Gen 49:18). And, but I will rejoice in the Lord: and I will joy in God my Jesus (Hab 3:18).

The Birth of Christ

The Magi in Jerusalem

2:1 When Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Judah, in the days of King Herod, behold, there came magi from the east to Jerusalem, [n. 161]

2:2 saying: where is he who is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to adore him. [n. 168]

160. Above, the Evangelist treated of the generation of Christ; here he intends to make clear his birth.

And first, the witness of the magi;

second, the witness of the innocents, at and after they had departed (Matt 2:13).

Concerning the first, he does three things:

for first the birth of Christ is announced;

second, the place is sought;

third, the person is sought.

The second is at and King Herod hearing this (Matt 2:3); the third is at then Herod (Matt 2:7).

Concerning the first, he does three things:

for first, he sets out Christ’s birth, to which testimony is given;

second, he brings in the witnesses;

third, he sets down the testimony.

The second is at behold, there came magi. The third is at where is he who is born?

161. Concerning the first, he touches on four things: the birth, the name of the one born, the place, and the time.

The first is at when Jesus therefore was born. And it should be noted that Luke follows this up more completely, as on the other hand Matthew follows up the adoration of the magi more completely than Luke.

The name is touched upon at Jesus. The place, at in Bethlehem of Judah, not of Judea, because the entire region of the Israelite people is called Judea, but of Judah. This is the land which fell to the lot of Judas. It says Bethlehem of Judah to distinguish it from another Bethlehem which is in the tribe of Zabulon (Josh 19:10).

162. And notice that these three words, when Jesus therefore was born in Bethlehem of Judah, in the days of King Herod, are fittingly set down. For Bethlehem signifies the Church, in which Jesus was born who is the true bread, of whom it is said, I am the living bread which came down from heaven (John 6:51). Therefore, salvation comes to no one unless he is in the house of the Lord. In these the Savior is born, Christ; iniquity will no more be heard in your land, wasting nor destruction in your borders, and salvation will possess your walls, and praise your gates (Isa 60:18).

And he added King to distinguish him from another Herod, for this was the one under whom Christ was born, the Ashkelonite; but the other, who killed John, was the son of this Herod, and was not a king.

163. But it is asked why Scripture mentions the time. And one should say, for three reasons. First, to show that Jacob’s prophecy is fulfilled: the sceptre will not be taken away from Judah, nor a ruler from his thigh, till he come that is to be sent, and he will be the expectation of nations (Gen 49:10). For Herod was the first foreigner who reigned in Judea. The second reason is that a bigger sickness requires a bigger and better medicine. Now, the people of Israel were then in the greatest torment under a gentile lord, and so needed the greatest comforter; for in some of their torments prophets were sent to them, but now, on account of the greatness of the torment, the Lord of prophets was sent to them. According to the multitude of my sorrows in my heart, your comforts have given joy to my soul (Ps 93:19).

164. From there, he sets down the witnesses, at behold, there came magi. And they are described in three ways: by profession, by region, and by the place where they gave testimony.

And first he says, behold . . . magi, who according the common way of speaking are called incantators; but in the Persian language, philosophers and wise men are called magi. Indeed, these men came to Jesus because they had recognized that the glory of the wisdom which they possessed was from Christ. And they are a certain first-fruits of the gentiles, because they first came to Christ. And according to Augustine, the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled by their coming: for before the child know to call his father and his mother, the strength of Damascus, and the spoils of Samaria will be taken away before the king of the Assyrians (Isa 8:4); for before Christ spoke, he took away the strength of Damascus and the riches and spoils of Samaria, i.e., idolatry. For they had given up idolatry, and brought gifts.

Similarly, one should consider that some came to Christ from the Jews, namely the shepherds, and some from the gentiles, namely the magi; for Christ himself is the stone at the corner, who makes both into one.

And why magi and shepherds? Because the shepherds were more simple, and these magi were more sinful, to indicate that Christ accepts both.

The Evangelist does not say how many magi there were. But it seems, according to the gifts, that there were three kings, however many others were represented among them; and the gentiles will walk in your light, and kings in the brightness of your rising (Isa 60:3).

165. Concerning the second thing, namely the region, he says, from the east.

And it should be noted that some explain this as from the end of the east; but then how had they come in so few days? And the response is, as some say, that they came miraculously; others, that they had camels. But Chrysostom says that the star appeared to them two years before the birth, and that they prepared themselves at that time, and came to Jerusalem in two years and three days.

However, it can be explained in another way, so as to say from the east, i.e., from a certain region which was close by the eastern part of Jerusalem; for they say that these men were of the sect of Balaam, who said: a star will rise out of Jacob (Num 24:17). This Balaam lived next to the land of promise in the eastern region.

166. There follows, concerning the place, to Jerusalem. But why did they come to Jerusalem? There are two reasons. One, because it was the royal city; hence they were seeking the king of the Jews in the royal city. Again, this was done by divine arrangement, so that the first testimony to Christ might be given in Jerusalem, so that the prophecy might be fulfilled: the law will come forth from Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem (Isa 2:3).

167. Next he sets down the testimony, where is he who is born, in which they say three things:

first, they announce the birth of the king;

second, they produce a sign of his birth, at for we have seen his star;

third, they declare a pious purpose, at and are come to adore him.

168. They say then, where is he who is born? Now, one should consider that these magi are the first-fruits of the gentiles, and they prefigure in themselves our state. For they supposed one thing, namely the birth of Christ, and they sought another thing, namely the place; and indeed we hold to the faith of Christ, but we seek something, namely by hope, for we will see him face to face. We walk by faith, and not by sight (2 Cor 5:7).

But there is a question. Since they had heard that there was a king in Jerusalem, how did they say those things? For all who profess another king in the city of the king expose themselves to danger. But surely they acted out of the zeal of faith. Hence their fearless faith is announced in these words. Below: and do not fear those who kill the body (Matt 10:28).

169. Next they set forth a sign of this birth, we have seen.

And notice that there is an occasion for two errors in these words. Some men, such as the Priscilians, said that every human act is performed and guided by fate. And they confirmed their opinion by this text, for we have seen his star. Therefore he was born under some star. Another error is that of the Manichees, who rejected fate, and as a consequence rejected this Gospel, because they said that Matthew brought in fate. But both errors are excluded.

170. But before we proceed to the explanation of the text, it is necessary to see what fate is, and in what way these things should be believed, and in what way not.

Note then that we see that many things in human affairs happen per accidens and accidentally. Now, it happens that some chance and fortuitous thing is related to a lower cause, which is not fortuitous as related to a higher cause; as if some lord sent three servants to search for someone, and one servant did not know the other. If they met one another, it would be by chance, for them; but if one looks to the intention of the lord, it would not be by chance.

But in accord with this there are two opinions about fate. Some said that these chance things are not traced back into some higher ordering cause, and they did away with fate, and beyond this with all divine providence. And this, according to Augustine, was Cicero’s opinion. But we say that these chance things are traced back into a higher ordering cause. But since ‘fate’ is taken from for, faris as though a certain pronouncement and speaking out by which the ordering of things is caused, there is a difference amongst those who believe in fate. For some have said that it is by the power of the bodies above the heavens that things are ordered. Hence they say that fate is nothing other than the arrangement of the stars.

Others lead these happenstance things back into divine providence. But one should deny that the first way is fate. For human acts are not guided according to the arrangement of the heavenly bodies; which is clear right away, since there are many things which work for this argument.

First, because it is impossible that a bodily power should act on a non-bodily power, because nothing lower in the order of nature acts on a higher nature. Now, there are certain powers in the soul elevated above the body, while certain powers are attached to an organ, namely the sensitive and nutritive powers. And certainly the heavenly bodies, although they directly act on lower bodies, and change them per se, yet they act per accidens on the powers attached to organs. But in the powers not attached to organs they in no way act by necessitating, but only by inclining. For we say that this man is angry, i.e., prone to anger, and this is from heavenly causes; but directly, choice as such is in the will. Hence there can never come about such an arrangement in the human body but that the opinion of free judgment is far greater. Hence whoever would put free judgment under the heavenly bodies would of necessity hold that sense and intellect do not differ.

Second, because all divine worship is excluded by this notion of fate, because then all things would be of necessity; and thus even the directing of the republic would be destroyed, because then it would not be necessary either to deliberate, or to provide for anything, and so on.

Third, because we would attribute to God the wickedness of men, which would be to insult him who is the Creator of the stars.

Therefore it is clear that to say this is entirely contrary to the faith. And so Gregory says: be it gone from the hearts of the faithful that fate is said to be something! Now, if you wish divine providence to be called fate, then that is something. But, as Augustine says, since we ought not have anything in common with the infidels, we ought not to give this name to it. Hence he says, correct the tongue, hold the opinion.

Therefore it cannot be said, we have seen his star, i.e., the star from which his whole life depends; for according to Augustine, then the star would not have followed the one generated, since then Christ would be called rather the fate of the star than the other way around.

171. And one should note that this star was not one of the first things caused, which is clear from four things. First, from motion, because no star moves from the north into the south. Now, the region of the Persians, from which these magi came, is set in the north. Likewise, the other stars never rest; but this one did not move constantly. Third, from time, because no star shines in the day, but this one offered light to the magi during the day. Fourth, from position, because it was not positioned in the firmament, as is clear, because the magi clearly picked out the house by means of it.

And so one should say that this star had been specially created for the service of Christ. And therefore it says, we have seen his star, i.e., the one made for his service.

172. But certain men say that this star was the Holy Spirit, who, just as he appeared above the baptized Christ in the appearance of a dove, so also now in the appearance of a star. Others say that it was an angel.

But one should say that it was a true star. And he wished to be revealed under the guidance of a star, first, because it befit him. For he is the king of the heavens, and so he wished to be known through heavenly guidance; the heavens show forth the glory of God, and the firmament declares the work of his hands (Ps 18:2); indeed, he wished to be known to the Jews through angels, through whom they received the law: being ordained by angels (Gal 3:19), and to the gentiles through a star, because they came to the knowledge of God through creatures; for the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made (Rom 1:20).

Second, because it fit with those to whom he was shown, namely with the gentiles, whose calling was promised to Abraham in the likeness of stars; look up to heaven and number the stars, if you can (Gen 15:5). Hence both in the birth and in the passion, there was a sign in heaven which made Christ known to all the gentiles.

Again, it fit with all, because he himself is the Savior of all.

173. But he says, in the east, which is explained in two ways. According to Rabanus, this way: a star existing in Judah appeared to these gentiles in the east. Or: we have seen the star in the east. This is better said. Hence, behold the star which they had seen in the east, went before them (Matt 2:9).

Likewise, it is clear from the fact that this star was positioned near to the earth, since otherwise they would not have distinguished the place of Christ’s birth. Therefore it could not have been seen from so remote a region.

174. Next the pious intention is set down, and are come to adore him.

Here there are two questions. For Augustine says, were they not rather odd, since whenever there was some indication by some star they went seeking the king who was born? For this would have been stupid.

But one should say that did they not give service to an earthly king, but to a heavenly king; in this the divine power is shown to have been present, because otherwise, if they had sought an earthly king, they would have lost all devotion when they found him wrapped in worthless rags.

175. But again Augustine asks: how were they able to know from a star that a man-God had been born? And he responds that this was by the revelation of an angel; for the one who showed them the star sent an angel who revealed this. Pope Leo says that, as the exterior eyes were filled with the light of that star, so the interior divine ray revealed the mystery to them. The third reason: because they were of the stock of Balaam, who said, a star will rise out of Jacob (Num 24:17). Hence they had it from his prophecy. And thus, seeing so bright a star, they suspected that the heavenly king had been born, and so they sought him. And this is and are come to adore him. In this is fulfilled: and all kings of the earth will adore him: all nations will serve him (Ps 71:11).

Herod’s mission

2:3 And King Herod, hearing this, was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. [n. 177]

2:4 And assembling together all the chief priests and the scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ would be born. [n. 180]

2:5 But they said to him: in Bethlehem of Judah. For so it is written by the prophet: [n. 182]

2:6 and you, Bethlehem the land of Judah, are not the least among the princes of Judah: for out of you will come forth the captain that will rule my people Israel. [n. 184]

2:7 Then Herod, privately calling the wise men, learned diligently of them the time of the star which appeared to them; [n. 186]

2:8 and sending them into Bethlehem, said: go and diligently inquire after the child, and when you have found him, bring me word again, that I also may come to adore him. [n. 188]

2:9 Who, having heard the king, went their way. And behold the star which they had seen in the east, went before them, until it came and stood over where the child was. [n. 190]

176. The birth of Christ having been foretold by the magi, here he inquires about the place of the birth. And three things are set down:

first, the motive for inquiring is set down;

second, the inquiry itself is set down;

third, the discovery of the truth.

The second is at and assembling together. The third is at but they said to him: in Bethlehem of Judah.

177. The motive was Herod’s agitation; hence, and King Herod, hearing this, was troubled. And he called Herod the King with meaning, to show that he is other than the king whom they are seeking.

Now, there are three causes of agitation. The first proceeds from ambition, which Herod had with regard the preservation of his kingdom, because he was a foreigner. For he knew or had heard but in the days of those kingdoms the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, and his kingdom will not be delivered up to another people, and it will break in pieces, and will consume all these kingdoms, and itself will stand for ever (Dan 2:44). But in this he was deceived, because that was a spiritual kingdom: my kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36). Hence Herod was disturbed, fearing the total destruction of his kingdom; now will the prince of this world be cast out (John 12:31). And notice that, as Chrysostom says, men established in the highest positions are disturbed by the lightest word brought against them; I am poor, and in labors from my youth: and being exalted have been humbled and troubled (Ps 87:16); but the humble never fear.

The second cause proceeds from fear of the Roman Emperor. For it was set up as a law by the Roman Emperor that no one should be called a god or a king without his consent; hence he was afraid. But this fear was worldly, which is forbidden; who are you, that you should be afraid of a mortal man, and of the son of man, who will wither away like grass? (Isa 51:12)

Third, from the blush of shame. For he was ashamed before the people that another should be called king; as in Saul’s request, who said, I have sinned: yet honor me now before the ancients of my people, and before Israel (1 Sam 15:30).

178. But what follows is strange: and all Jerusalem with him. For it would seem that they should have rejoiced. But one should know that they had three reasons for being disturbed. First was their iniquity; for they were wicked, to whom the behavior of the just is always detestable. Fools hate them that flee from evil things (Prov 13:19). Second, that they might please Herod; as the judge of the people is himself, so also are his ministers (Sir 10:2). Third, because they were afraid lest, when he heard it, Herod should vent his rage all the more upon the Jewish nation.

179. But mystically, this signified that he was earthly. Gregory: the king of earth was disturbed when the king of heaven was born, doubtless because the earthly is thrown in confusion by loftiness, when the height of heaven is opened. And the moon will blush, and the sun will be ashamed, when the Lord of hosts will reign in Mount Zion, and in Jerusalem (Isa 24:23).

And it should be noted that, as Augustine says, now what will be the judgment seat of the one who judges, when the cradle of an infant terrified the haughty kings? Let kings be in dread of the one sitting at the right hand of the Father, whom the impious king feared sucking at his mother’s breasts.

180. And assembling together. Here the inquiry is set down. And, as was said, Herod was anxious to inquire, both for the sake of his kingdom, and for fear of the Romans; hence he inquired after the truth.

But to have certainty about something, three things are sought by the one who inquires: for credence is given to the multitude, to authorities, and to the learned. Hence he gathered many together, both those having authority, and the wise. And this is what it says: assembling together all, as regards the first, now the multitude of the wise is the welfare of the whole world (Wis 6:26). The chief priests, as regards the second; for the lips of the priest will keep knowledge, and they will seek the law at his mouth (Mal 2:7). And the scribes, as regards the third: they are not called scribes only for writing, but for interpreting the writings of the law; indeed, by these he wished to search out the truth. In the company of great men take not upon you: and when the ancients are present, speak not much (Sir 32:13).

He inquired of them where the Christ would be born. The magi had called him a king, but they were seeking the Christ himself; for they knew by conversation with the Jews that the legitimate king of the Jews was anointed.

181. But it is asked: either he believed the prophecy, or he did not. If he believed, he knew that he could not stand in the way, but that this one would reign; why then did he kill the children? If he did not believe, then why did he ask?

But one should say that he did not believe perfectly, because he was ambitious, and ambition makes a man blind.

182. But they said to him: in Bethlehem of Judah. Here the truth is found. And

first, the truth is set down;

second, it is confirmed by the prophecy of it, ‘and you Bethlehem the land of Judah.’

183. And one should know that Christ willed to be born in Bethlehem for three reasons. First, to avoid glory. For he chose two places for this reason: the one in which he was born, namely Bethlehem; the other in which he suffered, namely Jerusalem. And this is against those who seek glory, who wish to be born in high places, and do not wish to suffer in a place of honor. But I seek not my own glory (John 8:50).

Second, to confirm his teaching, and show his truth. For if he had been born in some great city, the strength of his teaching could be attributed to human strength; you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Cor 8:9).

Third, to show that he was of the family of David; and Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem (Luke 2:3).

It also fits with a mystery, because Bethlehem is interpreted as ‘house of bread’, and Christ is the living bread which comes down from heaven (John 6:51).

184. Next, the truth is confirmed. Hence, ‘and you Bethlehem.’

We can take up two things from this prophecy: for the magi announced one thing, and sought another. And both are shown from this prophecy: for as regard the first it says, ‘and you Bethlehem’; as regards the second it says, ‘out of you will come forth the captain.’

And thus the birth of Christ is confirmed by a twofold testimony, namely that of the star and that of the prophecy, because truth is in the mouth of two or three witnesses; in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word will stand (Deut 19:15).

And notice that when they were all unbelievers, they were given bodily signs; when they were already believers, a prophecy was given; wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to believers, but to unbelievers; but prophecies not to unbelievers, but to believers (1 Cor 14:22).

185. And one should know that the Jews failed in bringing forth the prophecy in two ways. Because it says there, and you, Bethlehem Ephrata (Mic 5:2), and again because ‘are not the least’ is not there.

And two reasons can be given for why they changed it. In one way, one could say that they did this out of ignorance. In another way, one could say that they knowingly used different words. And they speak an opinion. For since Herod was a foreigner, he would not have understood the text of the prophet, and so they said what would be known to Herod. Hence they say, ‘land of Judah’, and ‘are not the least’, i.e., you are not the smallest among the thousands of men of Judah; or ‘among the princes of Judah’, i.e., among principal cities of Judas. ‘For out of you will come forth the captain that will rule my people Israel.’ About this captain it is said, Christ the captain (Dan 9:25). And in the Psalms, you will be my captain; for he rules the people of Israel not only bodily, but even spiritually; has God cast away his people? (Rom 11:1). Give ear, O you who rule Israel: you who lead Joseph like a sheep (Ps 79:2).

And note that they cut off the end of the text, namely and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. It is implied in this that he would not be an earthly king, but a heavenly one; which if Herod had known, he would not have been impious. Hence they were the cause of the murder of those babies. Likewise, it is clear from the end part that the Jews’ interpretation is false, who expound this verse as about Zorobabel; because and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity (Mic 5:2) does not fit with him. Again, he was not born in Judah, but in Babylon.

186. Next the person born is inquired about, when it says, then Herod, privately calling the wise men, learned diligently of them the time of the star which appeared to them.

And first, the inquiry is set down;

second, the discovery of the one sought, at they found the child (Matt 2:11);

third, the veneration of the one found, at and falling down, they adored him (Matt 2:11).

They were moved to seek the person by two things: by the persuasion of Herod, and by the guidance of the star. Hence,

concerning the first, an exhortation is set down;

second, the zeal of the magi in the changing of the star, at who, having heard the king, went their way.

Concerning the first, three things are set down:

for first, he inquires about the time;

second, he announces the place, at and sending them into Bethlehem;

third, he charges them with the duty of seeking, at go and diligently inquire after the child.

187. So he says, then Herod. Here it should be considered that the Jews knew the place, but not the time. Hence they were silenced by the Lord, because you have not known the time of your visitation (Luke 19:44), and: the ox knows his owner, and the ass his master’s crib: but Israel has not known me, and my people have not understood (Isa 1:3). So the time is sought. And Chrysostom says that this star appeared for two years. But others say that it appeared on the very day of the birth.

188. He announces the place, at and sending.

189. He charges them with the duty of inquiring at go and diligently inquire. And he urges them to two things, and so that they would do them, he added a third. As regards the first he says, go. And he sought insidiously, for the sake of killing, like those to whom it is said, you will seek me, and will not find me (John 7:34). As regards the second, he speaks this way: when you have found him, bring me word again. And he said this for the sake of evil as well; by much talk he will sift you (Sir 13:14). As regards the third, he says, that I also may come to adore him. And indeed deceitfully he promised worship of God; their tongue is a piercing arrow, it has spoken deceit (Jer 9:8); who speak peace with their neighbor, but evils are in their hearts (Ps 27:3).

And note that while the magi professed a king, this man calls him a child, because out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Matt 12:34).

Note also that he asked the Jews where the Christ would be born, wishing to test and find out whether they would rejoice.

190. Next, the zeal of the magi is set down. Two things had been enjoined: that they should inquire, and that they should return; but the magi did only one. Hence, who, having heard the king, went their way. And they did not do the other.

Indeed, listeners should be such that they learn the good things, and truly leave behind the evil things; below, all things therefore, whatever they will say to you, observe and do, but according to their works do not (Matt 23:3).

Adoration of the Magi

2:9 Who, having heard the king, went their way. And behold the star, which they had seen in the east, went before them, until it came and stood over where the child was. [n. 191]

2:10 And seeing the star they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy. [n. 195]

2:11 And entering into the house, they found the child with Mary his mother, and falling down they adored him; and opening their treasures, they offered him gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. [n. 196]

2:12 And having received an answer in sleep that they should not return to Herod, they went back another way into their country. [n. 202]

191. Above, the Evangelist set down one of the magi’s motives, namely Herod’s persuasion; here he sets down the magi’s other motive for seeking Christ, namely the guidance of the star. And concerning this, he does two things:

for first, he sets down the guidance of the star;

second, the joyful effect of this guidance, at and seeing the star they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy.

And note that the star accomplished the first by its own motion, because it led the magi directly to Christ; likewise, it pointed to the child’s place by its own location, at until it came and stood over where the child was.

192. Hence as regards the first, he said, went before them.

And from the fact that it says, behold the star, which they had seen in the east, went before them, one is given to understand that when the magi turned aside into Jerusalem, the star disappeared; but when they withdrew from Herod, it appeared.

Now, it disappeared for three reasons. First, for the confounding of the Jews, for while they were instructed in the law so that they might seek Christ, and the gentiles were not instructed, yet the gentiles sought, and the Jews scorned. Hence it is fulfilled that the nations that did not know you will run to you (Isa 55:5).

Second, for the instruction of the magi; for the Lord wished to show himself to them not only through a star, but also through the law, so that the knowledge of the law might be joined to the knowledge of creatures. In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word will stand (Deut 19:15). To the law rather, and to the testimony (Isa 8:20).

Third, for our instruction. And we are instructed about two things, according to the Gloss. First, that he who seeks human help will be forsaken by the divine. For it is unlawful to seek after human help by not seeking divine; woe to them that go down to Egypt for help, trusting in horses, and putting their confidence in chariots, because they are many: and in horsemen, because they are very strong: and have not trusted in the Holy One of Israel, and have not sought after the Lord (Isa 31:1). Second, we are instructed about this, that we who are faithful should not seek signs, as do those who seeing the star . . . rejoiced; but we ought to be content with the teaching of the prophets, because signs are given to those who do not believe.

193. There is also a twofold mystery in this. For the star signifies Christ; I am the root and stock of David, the bright and morning star (Rev 22:16). Hence by this star we can understand the grace of God, which we lose when we approach Herod, i.e., the devil; for you were heretofore darkness, but now light in the Lord (Eph 5:8).

Similarly, when we withdraw from Herod, i.e., from the devil, we find the star, i.e., the grace of Christ; as in Exodus, where it says that the Lord went before Israel in the appearance of fire when they went up out of Egypt (Exod 13:21). And here he went before in the appearance of a star.

194. Until it came and stood over where the child was. We understand two things here. One, that this star was not very high, because otherwise they would not have picked out the house of the child. Another, that the star, having fulfilled its duty, was resolved back into its matter.

Where the child was. He calls him a child frequently, so that you may know that it is he of whom it is said: a child is born to us (Isa 9:6).

195. Next, the effect of this guidance is set down with regard to the magi. Hence, and seeing the star they rejoiced. They rejoiced because of hope, which they had regained. For they were afraid of losing what they hoped for, because they came from a far distant place; rejoicing in hope (Rom 12:12). Again he adds with joy; for some men rejoice, and yet do not rejoice, because human happiness is not perfect joy; mourning takes hold of the end of joy (Prov 14:13). But true and perfect joy is about God; I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, and my soul will be joyful in my God (Isa 61:10). Third, he adds great, because these men already knew great things about God, namely that God was incarnate, and very merciful; rejoice, and praise, O habitation of Zion: for great is he that is in the midst of you, the Holy One of Israel (Isa 12:6). Fourth, he adds exceedingly, because they rejoiced intensely, for they had regained what they had lost; so I say to you, there will be joy before the angels of God upon one sinner doing penance (Luke 15:10).

196. Next, he treats of the finding of the child. Hence, and entering into the house, they found the child. And he touches upon three things: the house, which, if it be asked what sort it was, Luke makes it clear (Luke 2:7). Likewise, if it be asked what sort of child they found, He differed in nothing from other children, as the saints say. As regards appearance, he did not speak, he seemed weak, and so on. Again, if it be asked what sort of mother they found, it is responded, such as is the wife of a carpenter.

And I say this because if these men had come seeking an earthly king, they would have been scandalized by seeing these things; but seeing worthless things, and considering the things most high, they were moved to admiration, and adored him. And this is and falling down they adored him.

But why is no mention made of Joseph? One should say that it happened by divine providence that he was not there, lest these men who were the first-fruits of the gentiles be given the suspicion of a misformed opinion.

197. Next, he touches upon the reverence which they showed to the child, at and falling down.

And it was threefold: in adoring, in offering, and in obeying.

198. So he says, and falling down, they adored him, as God hidden in man; before him the Ethiopians will fall down (Ps 71:9).

199. Again, they showed reverence by offering; hence, and opening their treasures. For it was customary among the Persians that they always adored with gifts; and this is and opening their treasures, they offered him gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. The kings of Tharsis and the islands will offer presents: the kings of the Arabians and of Saba will bring gifts (Ps 71:10). All they from Saba will come, bringing gold and frankincense: and showing forth praise to the Lord (Isa 60:6).

200. Mystically, one should consider that these men did not open their treasures on the way, but first opened their treasures when they came to Christ; similarly, we should not make our goods seen on the way. Hence this is reproached below, concerning the virgins (Matt 25:1–12), and it is said: the kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in a field. Which a man, having found it, hides, and out of joy goes, and sells all that he has, and buys that field (Matt 13:44).

201. They offered him gifts. Some give a literal reason for these gifts, and they say that they found three things: a dirty house, a weak child, and the mother a pauper. And so they offered gold for the sustenance of the mother, myrrh for the sustenance of the child’s members, and frankincense to take away the smell.

But it should be said that something is set out mystically here, and these three things are referred more to those three things which we ought to offer, namely faith, action, and contemplation.

As regards faith, in two ways: first as regards those things which come together in Christ. Clearly, the royal dignity; a king will reign, and he will be wise (Jer 23:5); and so in tribute they offered gold. The greatness of the priesthood; and so they offered frankincense in sacrifice. The mortality of a man; and so they offered myrrh. Similarly, as regards the faith of the Trinity, because the persons of the Trinity are indicated in us.

Second, they can be referred to our action. For wisdom can be indicated through gold; if you . . . will dig for her as for a treasure: then you will understand the fear of the Lord (Prov 2:4). Through frankincense, devoted prayer; let my prayer be directed as incense in thy sight; the lifting up of my hands, as evening sacrifice (Ps 140:2). Through myrrh, the mortification of the body: mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth (Col 3:5); my hands dropped with myrrh (Song 5:5).

And as regards contemplation, by these three can be signified the three senses of Sacred Scripture, namely the literal sense, under which are comprehended the allegorical, the anagogical, and the moral; or the three parts of philosophy, namely moral, logic, and natural; for we ought to use all these for the service of God.

202. Next is set down how they showed reverence in obeying. Hence, and having received an answer in sleep that they should not return to Herod, they went back another way into their country.

But how did they who did not ask a question receive an answer?

But it should be said that the Lord sometimes responds to a mental question, and these men were asking interiorly what would please God concerning the return; why do you cry to me? (Exod 14:15).

203. But are revelations immediately from God? Dionysius proves that they are only through the mediation of angels. So why does he not name the angel?

But one should say that whenever Scripture mentions God and not an angel, this is because of a certain excellence of that manifestation; the law was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator (Gal 3:19); this is that Moses who said to the children of Israel: a prophet will God raise up to you of your own brethren, as myself: him will you hear (Acts 7:37). Hence what the Gloss says, that this was immediately from God, is referred to Scripture’s manner of speaking.

204. They went back another way into their country. This shows that we come to our country, paradise, from which we were expelled by sin, through obedience. For the Lord knows the ways that are on the right hand: but those are perverse which are on the left hand (Prov 4:27).

Chrysostom says here that these men, having returned, led holy lives, and later were made co-helpers of St. Thomas the Apostle; yet nothing is found written in the Sacred Scriptures after their return.

The holy innocents and flight into Egypt

2:13 And after they had departed, behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph, saying: arise, and take the child and his mother, and fly into Egypt: and be there until I tell you. For it will come to pass that Herod will seek the child to destroy him. [n. 206]

2:14 Who arose, and took the child and his mother by night, and retired into Egypt; [n. 213]

2:15 and he was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: out of Egypt have I called my Son. [n. 213]

2:16 Then Herod perceiving that he was deluded by the magi, was exceedingly angry; and, sending, killed all the male children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the borders thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the magi. [n. 217]

2:17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying: [n. 225]

2:18 a voice in Rama was heard, lamentation and great mourning; Rachel bewailing her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not. [n. 228]

2:19 But when Herod was dead, behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph in Egypt, [n. 232]

2:20 saying: arise, and take the child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel. For they are dead who sought the soul of the child. [n. 234]

2:21 Who arose, and took the child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. [n. 236]

2:22 But hearing that Archelaus reigned in Judea in place of Herod his father, he was afraid to go there: and being warned in sleep retired into the quarters of Galilee. [n. 238]

2:23 And coming he dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was said by prophets: that he will be called a Nazarene. [n. 239]

205. It was recounted above how the magi bore testimony to Christ at his birth; but now the Evangelist treats of how the innocents bore testimony, not by speaking, but by dying.

And concerning this he does three things:

first, the hiding of Christ is set down;

second, the killing of the children, at then Herod;

third, the return of Christ is set down, at but when Herod was dead.

Concerning the first, he does three things:

first, the angel’s warning is set down;

second, Joseph’s obedience is shown;

third, the fulfillment of the prophecy.

The second is at that it might be fulfilled.

Concerning the first, three things are touched upon:

first, the time of the apparition is set down;

second, the apparition itself and the mode of the apparition is set down, at behold, an angel;

third, the warning itself, given through the angel, is set down at arise, and take the child.

206. The time is described at and after they had departed. And one should understand that this apparition was not immediately after the departure of the magi, because the whole of what is said in Luke (Luke 2:6) and following should be placed in between, namely about the purification: and after the days of her purification . . . were accomplished (Luke 2:22). For Herod did not at once contemplate killing the children. Hence when he says, and after they had departed, one ought to put in here the whole history of the purification.

207. Next, the apparition itself is set down; hence, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep.

It is said to appear in sleep, because at that time men rest from exterior actions, and to such ones comes a revelation through angels; in peace in the same I will sleep, and I will rest (Ps 4:9); if you sleep, you will not fear: you will rest, and your sleep will be sweet (Prov 3:24).

208. Three things are included in this warning: first, the angel persuades him to flee; second, he specifies the length of time; third, he gives the reason.

He says then, arise.

And notice, as Hilary says, that the Blessed Virgin is called wife before the birth, above (Matt 1:5), but not afterwards. And this is for two reasons. First, to commend the Virgin, for just as she conceived as a virgin, so she gave birth as a virgin. Second, on account of her dignity: for she was the mother of God, than which no dignity is greater, and a name is given from what is more dignified.

Notice likewise that, as Chrysostom says, the child had not come for the sake of the mother, but rather the other way around; and so he says, take the child and his mother.

209. But why fly into Egypt? Does not the Psalm say, O Lord, my helper, and my redeemer (Ps 18:15)?

But one should know that he fled for the sake of three things. First, to manifest his humanity; for as the divinity was apparent in the star, so the humanity was apparent in the flight. Being made in the likeness of men (Phil 2:7). Second, for the sake of example; for he showed by example what he taught by word. Below, and when they persecute you in this city, flee into another (Matt 10:23). Third, owing to a mystery: for just as he wished to die, so that he might call us back from death, so also he wished to flee, so that he might call back those fleeing from his face on account of sin. Where will I go from your spirit? Or where will I flee from your face? (Ps 138:7).

210. And be there. But why in Egypt, rather than in some other region?

One should say, for two reasons. The first is that it is proper to God that in wrath he is mindful of mercy (Hab 3:8). For the Lord was angry with the Egyptians, who were persecuting the children of Israel, because the children of Israel were God’s first-born. And so it is given to Egypt that it should aid the first-born; behold the Lord will ascend upon a swift cloud, and will enter into Egypt, and the idols of Egypt will be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt will melt in the midst thereof (Isa 19:1). The people that walked in darkness, have seen a great light: to them that dwelt in the region of the shadow of death, light is risen (Isa 9:2); we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth (John 1:14).

Second, because he himself had brought darkness into Egypt, so he wished to illuminate it first; and therefore well did he flee there; the people that walked in darkness, have seen a great light: to them that dwelt in the region of the shadow of death, light is risen (Isa 9:2).

211. Notice that when someone wishes to flee from sin, he ought first to cast off sloth; rise you who sleep, and arise from the dead: and Christ will enlighten you (Eph 5:14). Second, he ought to receive confidence from the mother, and from the Son, namely Christ; in me is all grace of the way and of the truth, in me is all hope of life and of virtue (Sir 24:25). Third, he ought to flee from sin, aided by the help of the mother and the child; lo, I have gone far off flying away; and I abode in the wilderness (Ps 54:8).

212. He adds next the reason for this flight, for it will come to pass that Herod will seek the child to destroy him. Herod had been deceived, because he wanted to destroy the one who had come to share his kingdom; and I dispose to you, as my Father has disposed to me, a kingdom (Luke 22:29). Second, because he wished to destroy him who did not seek earthly glory; who having joy set before him, endured the cross (Heb 12:2).

213. Who arose. Here is set down the execution of the angel’s command, and he sets it down as regards the flight, and as regards the length of time.

Hence, who arose, and took the child and his mother. And he mentions the time: by night, because of fear and tribulation, in accord with: my soul has desired you in the night (Isa 26:9), i.e., in tribulation, for in tribulations one should run back to God. In their affliction they will rise early to me: come, and let us return to the Lord (Hos 6:1). Then was it fulfilled, behold the Lord will ascend upon a swift cloud, and will enter into Egypt (Isa 19:1), which was fulfilled to the letter.

And he was there. It is said that he was there for seven years, and lived in the city of Heliopolis.

And with regard to a mystery, by Joseph are indicated the preachers, i.e., the apostles, who are established as preachers to expel darkness by teaching. Withdrawing from the Jews, they turned to the gentiles; to you it behoved us first to speak the word of God: but because you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the gentiles (Acts 13:46).

214. And be there until I tell you, i.e., until whenever the infidelity of the Jews is finished. Blindness in part has happened in Israel (Rom 11:25).

215. Next, he brings in the testimony of the prophet. Hence he says, that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet. This is, according to the translation of Jerome. But in the Septuagint translation it is not this way, but, out of Egypt I have called his son (Hos 11:1).

216. There seems to be a question here, because this does not seem to work to the purpose, because just before in the text of the prophecy it says, because Israel was a child, and I loved him: and I called my son out of Egypt, and so it seems to speak about the calling of Israel from Egypt.

But one should say that in all the Scriptural texts which are set down in the Gospels and in the epistles about Christ, a certain distinction should be noted; because some speak specially of Christ, as: he will be led as a sheep to the slaughter (Isa 53:7); but others speak of certain things according as they introduced a figure of Christ. And such is this text: for those men were only children of Israel insofar as they bore a likeness of the true only-begotten Son. And this is, ‘out of Egypt have I called my Son’, namely the particular Son.

217. Then Herod. Here he treats of the killing of the children; and

concerning this he does two things:

first, the occasion of the killing is set down;

second, the killing is set down, at and, sending, killed all the male children;

third, the prophecies are introduced, at then was fulfilled.

218. The occasion was Herod’s wrath; hence, then Herod . . . was exceedingly angry. For the anger of man works not the justice of God (Jas 1:20). And one should note that when some king suspects the loss of his kingdom, he is quickly angered and aroused.

Perceiving that he was deluded by the magi, was exceedingly angry. And it says exceedingly angry for two reasons: because when someone is angered, he is strongly aroused by a small pretext. Hence because he suspected the loss of the kingdom, and was deluded by the magi, he was exceedingly angry. Of one spark comes a great fire (Sir 11:34).

219. And sending. There was in this anger a cruelty as regards three things: as regards place, as regards multitude, and as regards time.

As regards multitude, he killed all to seek one. Hence it says, sending, killed all the male children. And note that Augustine says, this man never gained as much service as he did hate.

But it is asked, since they did not have free judgment, how are they said to die for Christ?

But, as it is said, God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but to save the world through himself (John 3:17). For God would never have permitted them to be killed, unless it were useful to them. Hence Augustine says that it is the same to doubt whether that killing profited them as to doubt whether children profit by baptism. For they suffered as martyrs, and confessed Christ by dying, although not by speaking. I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God (Rev 6:9).

220. The second cruelty is that he killed the male children in all the borders thereof, for he feared lest Christ should flee to some city. And Herod was affected like a wounded beast, which pays no attention to whom it should wound; as a roaring lion, and a hungry bear, so is a wicked prince over the poor people (Prov 28:15).

221. The third cruelty, as regards time. Hence, from two years old and under, i.e., of two years.

And note that Augustine says that the innocents were killed in the very year that Christ was born.

222. But why does he say from two years old and under? Some say that the star appeared for two years before Christ’s birth; hence Herod was unsure whether he had been born since the time of the star. And so he says, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the magi.

But others say that these children were not killed in the same year, but after two years.

223. But why did he delay so long? Three reasons are given, by various people. One is that he thought at first that the magi had been deceived, and that they would have found nothing; but afterwards he heard many things about Christ from Zachary and Simeon and Anna, and then he was moved to seek him. Others say that he did this out of caution; for he feared lest the parents should have hidden the child whom he sought. Hence he wanted to make sure of them first. Others say that he was held back by another affair, because he sent after the magi as far as Tharsus of Cilicia and burned their ships. Likewise, he was occupied with another affair because he was summoned to Rome, having been accused by his children. And so after his return he began to rage.

224. And it says, and under, because he thought him to be so powerful that he could change his face.

This killing points to the killing of martyrs, because martyrs are children through humility and innocence, below, suffer the little children, and do not forbid them to come to me (Matt 19:14); likewise below, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven (Matt 18:3).

In Bethlehem, and in all the borders thereof; because they are killed throughout the entire world; you will be witnesses unto me, namely by dying (Acts 1:8). The two years are the two-fold love, of God and of neighbor, because faith without works is dead (Jas 2:26).

And notice that when Christ is born, persecution rages at once, because when someone is converted to Christ, he begins to be tempted at once. Son, when you come to the service of God, stand in justice and in fear, and prepare your soul for temptation (Sir 2:1).

225. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the Prophet. Having set down the killing of the infants, here, as is his custom, the Evangelist places a prophecy foretelling it, which is: ‘a voice in Rama was heard, lamentation and great mourning; Rachel bewailing her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not’ (Jer 31:15).

And one should note that, as Jerome says, wherever the apostles or evangelists bring in some text of the Old Testament, it is not always necessary that they bring it in word for word, but as the Holy Spirit gave it to them, sometimes the sense of the sense, in our usage. Thus we have: a voice was heard on high of lamentation, of mourning, and weeping, of Rachel weeping for her children, and refusing to be comforted for them, because they are not (Jer 31:15). And the sense is the same.

226. And one should consider that, as far as pertains to this Scriptural text, this is one of those prophecies which are introduced in the Gospel which nevertheless have a literal sense which is a figure of that which happened in the New Testament.

Hence to understand it one must consider a certain historical account, where it says that because of the sin committed concerning the wife of a Levite, the whole tribe of Benjamin was savagely destroyed (Jusg 19); and it says that there was a most great wailing, so that it was heard from Gabaa even to Rama, about twelve miles distant from Bethlehem. This is called Rachel weeping, because Rachel was the mother of Benjamin; and it is a figurative speech, namely to express the magnitude of the sorrow. But this is a prophecy of bygone events.

227. It is also about the future, in two ways. For in one way it can be referred to the captivity of the Israelites, who are said to have wailed on the road next to Bethlehem when they were being led into captivity; and then Rachel is said to have wailed, because she was buried there (Gen 35:19). And this is said in the same way as a place is said to wail over the evils which happen in the place. So the prophet would have it that, just as there was the greatest sorrow and mourning when the tribe of Benjamin was destroyed, so there will come another greatest sorrow at the time of the captivity.

228. In a third way, it is explained thus. The Evangelist takes up the deed of the killing of the innocents and magnifies the sorrow in four ways. From the spreading out of sorrow, from the multitude of sorrows, from the matter, and from the inconsolability.

He says then, ‘a voice in Rama.’ Rama is a certain city in the tribe of Benjamin (Jos 18:25), and can be taken as the city of Lia. Moreover, this is taken as ‘high’, and can be explained in two ways. First, in this way: ‘a voice’, sounded forth on high, ‘was heard’, because a voice which is in a high place is spread out far and wide; get up upon a high mountain, you who bring good tidings to Zion: lift up your voice with strength (Isa 40:9). Or it ‘was heard’ on high, i.e., in heaven with God; the prayer of him that humbles himself, will pierce the clouds: and till it come near he will not be comforted: and he will not depart till the Most High behold (Sir 35:21). And again, do not the widow’s tears run down the cheek, and her cry against him that caused them to fall? (Sir 35:18).

229. ‘Lamentation.’ This can be referred to the crying of the infants who were killed. ‘And great mourning’; this can be referred to the mothers’ wailing. Or both can be referred to the children: ‘lamentation’ insofar as they were lifted up by the soldiers, ‘mourning’ insofar as they had their throats slit. The mothers’ sorrow is greater than the children’s. Likewise, the mothers’ was an enduring sorrow, while the children’s was brief; on account of which it is said, they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only son, and they will grieve over him, as the manner is to grieve for the death of the firstborn (Zech 12:10).

230. Again, from the matter of the sorrow, because it was over the death of children. Hence, ‘Rachel bewailing.’

But it is objected that Bethlehem was not in the tribe of Benjamin, but in the tribe of Judas, who was the son of Lia.

And this is resolved in three ways. First, because Rachel was buried next to Bethlehem (Gen 35:19). And thus she lamented the children in the same way that a place is said to lament; be astonished, O heavens, at this, and gates thereof, be very desolate, says the Lord (Jer 2:12).

Or in another way. It was said above that Herod killed the children in Bethlehem, and in all the borders thereof. Now, Bethlehem was on the common boundary of two tribes, namely of Judas and of Benjamin; hence some of the children of Benjamin were killed; and thus the objection rests, as Jerome explains it.

But Augustine explains it another way, and says that it is customary that when good fortunes follow someone, then adversities come, he sorrows all the more. Lia and Rachel were sisters, and those who were killed were of the sons of Lia. And thus they were killed bodily lest they be punished eternally, as happened in Gabaa. So she is said to lament, seeing that her own children were killed and damned.

Or, the Church is indicated by Rachel, because she is interpreted as seeing God, and the Church sees through faith. She laments her slain children, not because they are slain, but because through them she could have acquired others. Or she does not weep on account of the ones killed, but on account of the killers.

231. There follows, concerning the sorrow’s inconsolability, ‘and she would not.’ And this is explained in many ways. First, as it is referred to the people who lived at that time. For there should be consolation as long as some remedy is hoped for, but when no remedy is hoped for, there is no consolation, as is clear in the case of sick people who have despaired. And for this reason he says it is referred to the mothers’ thought ‘because they are not’, namely because they are gone; the boy does not appear (Gen 37:30). Or, ‘and would not be comforted, because they are not’, i.e., as if they were not; for consolation should only be over evils.

Hence according to this explanation it is referred to the thought of the Church, who sees them as reigning; hence she rejoices over them as over one who reigns, and we will not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning them that are asleep, that you be not sorrowful, even as others who have no hope (1 Thess 4:12). Or, she ‘would not be comforted’ about the present, but she expects consolation in the future; below, blessed are they who mourn: for they will be comforted (Matt 5:5).

232. Next he treats of how Christ was called back; hence, but when Herod was dead, behold an angel of the Lord appeared in sleep to Joseph in Egypt.

And first, he sets down the apparition of the angel;

second, the angel’s command;

third, the execution of the angel’s command.

233. Concerning the first, three things are set down. First, the time is described; second, the person; third, the manner of the apparition.

He says then, but when Herod was dead; not the man who was involved in Christ’s death, for that man was the son of this one. Behold, an angel of the Lord appeared.

One should note that every disturbance of the Church, according to a mystery, is ended by the death of the persecutor, because when the wicked perish there will be praise (Prov 11:10). Similarly, note that when the Jews’ infidelity was ended, Christ returned to them. And so all Israel should be saved (Rom 11:26).

Behold, an angel of the Lord appeared. One should note that the order of angels and men is such that divine enlightenments only come to us through angels; are they not all ministering spirits, sent to minister for them, who will receive the inheritance of salvation? (Heb 1:14). Hence even Christ, as a man, wished to be announced by angels.

The manner is at in sleep to Joseph in Egypt.

234. The command is at arise, and take the child. He does not say son, not spouse, but child, so as to indicate the dignity of the child, and the integrity of the mother. This points out that Joseph had not been given to her for bodily union, but for service and protection.

235. Next he gives the reason: for they are dead that sought the soul of the child.

But it is asked why he says, they. For none but Herod had died.

This is resolved in two ways. First, because that man had done so many evil things that the Jews rejoiced over his death; having foreseen this, he ordered his sister who was still alive to kill the more noble of the Jews when he died; and these Jews had been seeking the child’s soul along with Herod. And this is for they are dead that sought the soul of the child. Or in another way: it is the custom of Sacred Scripture to put the plural in place of the singular. Hence they are dead, i.e., he is dead.

Hence when he says, they are dead that sought the soul of the child, the error of Apollinaris is destroyed, who said that the divinity was in Christ in place of a soul.

236. The execution of this command is set down, who arose, and took the child and his mother; and concerning this he does three things:

first, he shows how he returned to the land of Israel;

second, what region he avoided;

third, into what region he turned aside, at being warned in sleep retired into the quarters of Galilee.

237. It says then, who arose. One should notice that the angel did not say, go into the land of Judas, or into Jerusalem, but generally into the land of Israel, which can include even Galilee. Hence it can be said that Joseph entered the boundaries of the land in which Judas dwelled.

238. Next he sets down which region he avoided, at but hearing that Archelaus reigned in Judea.

And the history of Herod should be noted here. This man Herod had six sons, and before his death he killed Alexander and Aristobolus; when he died, he ordered that Antipater should be killed. Hence three remained, among whom Archelaus was the first-born, and seized the kingdom for himself; but in the end, accused before Caesar Augustus by the Jews, the kingdom was taken away from him and divided into four parts, and Archelaus had two, and the others divided the other parts amongst themselves, so that Herod had one tetrarchy and Philip the other (Luke 3:1). This man Archelaus was sent into exile in the ninth year of his reign.

239. And being warned in sleep. The first angel had said that he should go to the land of Israel; but because Joseph did not yet understand, the angel who had revealed vaguely before now specifies. And this is, being warned in sleep retired into the quarters of Galilee.

But even then one may ask, why did he not fear Archelaus?

One should say that the king’s seat was in Jerusalem; hence he stayed there almost all the time.

But it is asked why Luke says that every year they were taking the child into Jerusalem (Luke 2:41).

And Augustine resolves this, saying that they took him safely through the great crowd which went up at that time, but there would have been danger if they had remained there a long while.

Again it is asked why the Evangelist implied that Joseph came into Nazareth as though by accident, while Luke says that he had his own home in Nazareth (Luke 2:39).

But one should say that the angel had told him that he should go into the land of Israel, which taken strictly did not contain Galilee or Nazareth; and this is how Joseph understood it. And this is why he did not intend to go into Nazareth.

240. That it might be fulfilled which was said by prophets: that he will be called a Nazarene. This is not found written anywhere, but one can say that it is gathered from many places. For Nazarene is interpreted as ‘holy’; and since Christ is called holy, and the saint of saints may be anointed (Dan 9:24), then it was with significance that he said by prophets. Or one can say that Nazarene is interpreted as ‘blooming’, and this is found in Isaiah: and there will come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower will rise up out of his root (Isa 11:1). And what it said in Song of Songs fits with him, I am the flower of the field, and the lily of the valleys (Song 2:1).

Christ’s Baptism

John’s baptism

3:1 And in those days came John the Baptist preaching in the desert of Judea. [n. 242]

3:2 And saying: do penance: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. [n. 247]

3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet, saying: a voice of one crying in the desert, prepare you all the way of the Lord, make straight his paths. [n. 251]

3:4 And the same John had his garment of camels’ hair, and a leather girdle about his loins: and his meat was locusts and wild honey. [n. 256]

3:5 Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the country about Jordan: [n. 257]

3:6 And were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins. [n. 259]

3:7 And seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them: you brood of vipers, who has showed you to flee from the wrath to come? [n. 261]

3:8 Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of penance. [n. 266]

3:9 And do not think to say within yourselves, we have Abraham for our father. For I tell you that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham. [n. 267]

3:10 For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not yield good fruit, will be cut down, and cast into the fire. [n. 270]

3:11 I indeed baptize you in the water unto penance, but he who will come after me, is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire. [n. 274]

3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly cleanse his floor and gather his wheat into the barn; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire. [n. 284]

241. Above, the Evangelist treated of the Christ’s entrance into the world; but now he treats of his progress, which indeed ought to be dealt with according to the progress of his teaching, because for this he came (John 18:37).

And concerning his teaching, two things are considered:

first, he sets down the preparation for the teaching;

second, he sets down the teaching itself (Matt 5).

Further, two things are required in a teacher of the Gospel teaching: first, that he be veiled by sacred mysteries; second, that he be proven in virtue. And so two things are placed before the teaching, namely his baptism and temptation (Matt 4).

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he introduces John the Baptist, at then went out to him Jerusalem;

second, the Baptizer’s instruction, at and seeing many.

Now, they are attracted by John in two ways, namely by word and by example. The second is at and the same John had his garment of camels’ hair.

Concerning John’s teaching he does or touches upon three things:

first, he introduces the person of the teacher; second, he sets down the teaching; third, a confirmation;

the second is at do penance; the third is at for this is he that was spoken of.

242. Concerning the person, he sets down five things, namely the time, the person, the office, the zeal, and the place.

The first is at and in those days. And one should note that Luke describes the time of his preaching by the princes of the republic and of the Jews (Luke 3:1–2). So what Luke says is expressed here, when he says, and in those days. Nor should this be referred to the days which were mentioned before, namely to the time of Christ’s infancy; for this should not be understood to have happened in the days when Christ returned from Egypt. But this is set down in this way because Christ dwelled in Nazareth without interruption; and the child grew, and waxed strong, full of wisdom; and the grace of God was in him (Luke 2:40).

243. Second, the person is set down, at came John the Baptist; came, i.e., he appeared who was hidden at first. It is he of whom it is said, this man came for a witness, to give testimony of the light (John 1:7).

But why did Christ want his testimony, when he had the testimony of works?

One should say, for three reasons. First, for our sake, for we are brought to spiritual knowledge through those things which are like us; this man came for a witness, to give testimony of the light, and why? That all men might believe through him (John 1:7). Second, owing to the malice of the Jews, because not only did Christ bear testimony to himself, as they said, you give testimony of yourself (John 8:13), but another bore testimony as well. You sent to John, and he gave testimony to the truth (John 5:33). Third, to show Christ’s equality with the Father, because as the Father had heralds, namely the prophets, so also Christ; and you, child, will be called the prophet of the Highest: for you will go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways (Luke 1:76).

244. Third, the office of baptizing is set down. This was his special office, because he baptized first; and his baptism was preparatory to the baptism of Christ, because if Christ had suddenly added a new ritual, men might have been scandalized. And so John came beforehand, to prepare men for baptism; that he may be made manifest in Israel (John 1:31).

245. Fourth, the zeal is set down, because he came to preach diligently. And this is preaching a baptism. Indeed Christ, the one about to be baptized, added those things: going therefore, teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19). But John prepared the way in both.

And one should note that John did this in his thirtieth year, at which age also David was made king, and Joseph took the helm of the kingdom of Egypt. By which one is given to understand that no one should be taken up for an office before the perfect age.

246. Fifth, the place is set down, in the desert. Now, he preached in the desert for four reasons. First, so that they might hear more quietly; for in the city many curious men come together, getting in the way, but only the eager go into the desert; the words of the wise are as goads, and as nails deeply fastened in, which by the counsel of masters are given from one shepherd (Eccl 12:11). Second, because it fit with his preaching, since he preached penance. Now, a place of penance ought to be that way, either bodily or mentally; lo, I have gone far off flying away; and I abode in the wilderness (Ps 54:8). Third, to point to the Church’s condition, which is signified by the desert: for one is given to understand that the preaching of salvation happens not in the synagogue, but in the Church; give praise, O you barren, that bears not: sing forth praise, and make a joyful noise, you who did not travail with child: for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that has a husband, says the Lord (Isa 54:1). Fourth, to indicate the condition of the Jews, who were already abandoned by God; below, behold, your house will be left to you, desolate (Matt 23:38).

247. There follows do penance. John announces a certain new life, as Augustine says in the book On Penance: no one who is established as the judge of his own will can begin a new life, unless he repents of the old life. Look in the Gloss. And so

first, he advises them to penance;

second, he announces salvation, at for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

248. Again, do penance, through which comes the remission of sins. Chrysostom: the Son of God having been born, God sent a herald into the world.

And one should note that to do penance and to repent are different. That man repents who weeps bitterly over sins, and does not commit deeds worthy of tears; and one should know that the whole thing is referred to the intention in his mind, namely that he be dedicated, and not commit deeds worthy of tears, i.e., intend not to commit such deeds; for penance requires this. But to do penance is to satisfy for sins; bring forth therefore fruits worthy of penance (Luke 3:8).

249. And here there is a question. Since all sins are remitted in baptism, why did John, foretelling the baptism of Christ, begin from penance?

And the Gloss responds that penance is threefold, namely: before baptism, because it is necessary that he should sorrow over sins when he approaches; second, after baptism, over mortal sins; third, over venial sins. Here he treats of the penance which is before baptism; whence Peter said: do penance (Acts 2:38), namely that you may be prepared for the salvation which is to follow.

250. Is at hand. And notice that the promise of the kingdom of heaven is never found in the Old Testament Scriptures; but John is the first to announce it, which pertains to his dignity.

Now, the kingdom of heaven is taken in four ways in the Scriptures. For sometimes Christ himself dwelling in us through grace is called the kingdom of heaven; for lo, the kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21). And he is called the kingdom of heaven because the road of the heavenly kingdom is begun by grace dwelling in us.

Second, the Sacred Scriptures are called the kingdom of God; below, the kingdom of God will be taken from you (Matt 21:43), i.e., the Sacred Scriptures. And this is called a kingdom because its law leads to a kingdom.

Third, the present Church militant is called the kingdom of heaven; below, again the kingdom of heaven is like to a net cast into the sea, and gathering together of all kind of fishes (Matt 13:47). And it is called the kingdom of heaven because it is established after the manner of the heavenly Church.

Fourth, the heavenly court is called the kingdom of heaven; below, and I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven (Matt 8:11). Now, before the time of John no mention was made except of the kingdom of the Jebusites (Exod 3:8), and only now is the kingdom of heaven promised to his Church.

251. Next, a confirmation of this statement is set down. For this is he that was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet. And, as Augustine says, this can be explained in two ways. First, that this, namely this is he that was written of, are the words of the Evangelist; and then the sense is more clear. Second, that this is brought in by Matthew, but as the words of John, who was doing penance. Hence this is, i.e., I am; and he speaks of himself as though of another, just as in John he speaks about another just as about himself (John 1). But it does not make much difference whose words they are, because the sense is the same.

This is he, therefore, that was written of, ‘a voice of one crying in the desert, prepare you all the way of the Lord, make straight his paths’ (Isa 40:3). Three things are set down, through which the aforementioned three things are confirmed.

First, the place of John’s preaching is foretold: ‘a voice of one crying in the desert’;

second, the coming of the kingdom of heaven; hence, ‘prepare you all the way’;

third, penance, at ‘make straight his paths.’

252. He says then, ‘a voice of one crying in the desert.’ And he says ‘a voice’ for three reasons. First because, as Gregory says, a voice precedes a word; and John precedes Christ. And he will go before him in the spirit and power of Elias (Luke 1:17). Second, because a word is known through a voice; for a voice draws a word down to knowledge, and in this way John drew Christ; that he may be made manifest in Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water (John 1:31). Third, because a voice without a word does not bring about certitude of mind for if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who will prepare himself to the battle? (1 Cor 14:8), and the revelation of divine things is not made through John except insofar as he announces Christ, but through Christ, the Word; the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him (John 1:18).

253. Therefore, ‘a voice of one crying’; and it can be understood in two ways. First, the voice of Christ crying, who was speaking in John; do you seek a proof of Christ who speaks in me? (2 Cor 13:3). And in this way he cried out in all the prophets. Hence it is always said: the Word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, or to Isaiah. And yet none had been called a voice because they did not immediately precede Christ; behold I send my angel, and he will prepare the way before my face. And presently the Lord, whom you seek, and the angel of the testament, whom you desire, will come to his temple (Mal 3:1).

Or, ‘a voice of one crying’, i.e., of John crying out.

One should know that a cry is made to the hard of hearing, and such were the Jews; hear, you deaf, and, you blind, behold that you may see. Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, but he to whom I have sent my messengers? (Isa 42:18–19). Second, out of indignation; and the Lord was exceedingly angry with his people: and he abhorred his inheritance (Ps 105:40). Third, to those standing far away: and they were far away from God.

254. ‘Prepare you all the way of the Lord.’ And it seems that it would have been more harmonious had he said, prepare your way for receiving the Lord.

And one should know that we were so weak that we would not have been able to approach the Lord unless he came to us. And this is why John said above, the kingdom of heaven is at hand; and this is, ‘prepare.’

But what is this ‘way’? The faith which is through hearing; that Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts (Eph 3:17). Gregory: the way of faith is consecrated by hearing; be prepared to meet your God, O Israel (Amos 4:12).

255. ‘Make straight his paths.’ The faith is common, is one; but it gives direction in different works. And hence, ‘make straight.’ Now, the ways of works are straight when they are not opposed to the divine law, which is the rule of human actions, as a potter is the rule of goodness in earthen vases (Jer 18:4).

Or, ‘prepare’, pertains to charity, which is necessary for salvation; this is the way, walk you in it: and go not aside neither to the right hand, nor to the left (Isa 30:21). Therefore, ‘the way’ is understood as the whole of that which pertains to common salvation; and I show unto you yet a more excellent way (1 Cor 12:31).

Indeed, the paths are the keeping of the counsels, which paths are said to be ‘straight’ because they should not be kept for the sake of empty glory; below, take heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them (Matt 6:1); and: her ways are beautiful ways, and all her paths are peaceable (Prov 3:17).

256. Next is shown the way in which John bore witness to Christ in his life, at and the same John.

But who bore witness to John, who was bearing witness to Christ? And one should say that his own life bore him witness: because, as Chrysostom says, no one is a suitable witness for another unless he is his own witness by a good life; the attire of the body, and the laughter of the teeth, and the gait of the man, show what he is (Sir 19:27).

Hence his austerity in life and food is described here; and this is and the same John had his garment of camels’ hair. Others with wool, John with hairs; for he considered clothing made of wool to be a softness which does not befit a preacher.

Similarly, a leather girdle. This is explained in two ways. Jerome says that at that time the Jews had a girdle of wool, but John considered this softness, and took his from skins, imitating Elias (2 Kgs 1:8). Rabanus expounds it this way, saying that John took crude, unprepared skins and used them, that he might restrain himself from lust; and this is a girdle. But whether it is explained in this way or in that way, still in either case the austerity of his life is understood.

And his meat was locusts and wild honey. This food was not prepared, but what nature supplied; and locusts are certain animals apt for eating.

And wild honey. This can be understood in two ways. For that is properly called wild honey which is not put away in artificially made tubs, but is found in the woods in some tree. Others say that it is reed honey, and one man says that it is found inside reeds, very sweet; yet nothing else is contained in all these explanations except that he was content with simple things; but having food, and wherewith to be covered, with these we are content (1 Tim 6:8).

257. Next he treats of the baptism; hence it says, then went out. And he touches upon three things: first, how he was visited by the crowds; second, how the crowds were baptized; and third, how they were confessing their sins.

258. And as regards the first, one should know that there were three things which drew men to go out to John. First, the new preaching. They had never heard mention of the kingdom of God, and so they marveled; do you know the order of heaven, and can you set down the reason of it on the earth? (Job 38:33). John was the first to teach that the notion of the kingdom of heaven is not to be set down on earth. Second, on account of his life. Hence he says, then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea, namely seeing his life; show me your faith without works; and I will show you, by works, my faith (Jas 2:18). Third, because Judea was deprived of the instruction of the prophets. Our signs we have not seen, there is now no prophet (Ps 73:9).

259. And so they went out from Judea to see; and this is then went out to him . . . and were baptized by him in the Jordan.

But why in the Jordan? Because baptism was first prefigured in the Jordan. It is said about Eliseus that he went across through the Jordan, and Elias was taken up into heaven (2 Kgs 2:8–11). Similarly, Naaman the leper was cleansed there, who signifies the one cleansed from sins in baptisms. Again, because its very meaning fits with baptism; for it is interpreted as ‘descent’, and it signifies humility, which a man ought to have in baptism. As newborn babes, desire the rational milk without guile (1 Pet 2:2).

260. Third, he sets down here confessing their sins. The reason why confession is introduced was shown above, namely that it is necessary for salvation; confess therefore your sins one to another (Jas 5:16). And the Gloss says that confession is introduced that a man might have shame. But one should know that shame is a concomitant reason, but the principle reason is because of the power of the key: for no one could bind or loose unless he knew what was to be bound or loosed. Hence just as no one can take away the necessity of the key, so no one can take away vocal confession.

But it is asked whether the one who approaches baptism is bound to confess. It seems that he does not need the power of the key, since everything is forgiven in baptism.

But one should say that one is bound to confess at least in general; and this takes place when one renounces satan and all his pomps, for in this we admit that we are bound to satan.

261. And seeing many. Having shown that many were baptized by John, here he treats of their instruction.

And concerning this he does two things:

first is set down who they are who are instructed;

second, their instruction is set down, at who has showed you to flee from the wrath to come?

262. It says then, and seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadducees. One should know that there were some sects among the Jews, among which there were chiefly these two. For the Pharisees were so called as though separated from the common life, because of their observances. They spoke well in many things, and yet they failed, because, as is said, they held that all things proceed from necessity. The others, namely the Sadducees, were called the just ones owing to certain special observances of the law. They did not accept the prophets, nor did they say that souls are awakened again after the corruption of the body, nor that souls are spirits.

Moreover, both were marked off by the very name, because ‘Phares’ signifies division, which is opposed to charity. And these were in every way divided from the others, as though they had a superabounding Holy Spirit; for this would be a good thing. The others also, namely the Sadducees, seized justice for themselves; against whom, for they, not knowing the justice of God, and seeking to establish their own, have not submitted themselves to the justice of God (Rom 10:3). And yet although they appeared more just, as though teachers, they were coming to John; kings will see, and princes will rise up, and adore for the Lord’s sake, because he is faithful, and for the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you (Isa 49:7).

263. Therefore these men are fittingly instructed here. Hence, who has showed you to flee from the wrath to come?

And one should note that instruction should be varied according to the condition of the listeners. For to the simple it is enough to speak briefly those things which pertain to salvation; but to the wise the individual points should be explained; which the Apostle implies, and I, brethren, could not speak to you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal (1 Cor 3:1). John did so: he briefly warned the crowds about penance, and announced the kingdom of heaven. Here, he explains these two things to the Pharisees point by point.

Hence, first, he exhorts them to penance;

second, he speaks about the approach of the kingdom of heaven, at I indeed baptize you.

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he sets out incentives to penance;

second, he removes those things which could draw them back from penance, at and do not think to say within yourselves, we have Abraham for our father.

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he sets out the incentive to penance;

second, he sets out the manner of perfect penance, at bring forth therefore fruit worthy of penance.

Now, there are two things which move one to penance: first, the recognition of one’s own sin; show my people their wicked doings (Isa 58:1); second, the fear of divine judgment. John announces these two things.

264. Hence he says, you brood of vipers.

And one should notice that in Sacred Scripture one is called a son of someone for imitation; your father an Amorrhite (Ezek 16:45); you are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do (John 8:44). These men were similar to vipers, and so he says, you brood of vipers. And they are similar in three ways, according to Chrysostom. For it is the nature of the viper to run back to water when it kills someone, and if it finds water it does not die; otherwise it dies. Hence John, considering their intention, why they were coming to the water of baptism, said, you brood of vipers. But how were the venomous ones coming to baptism? Because John was promising the remission of sins, hence he made them enter the water, laying aside their corrupt intention, and this is why he says, do penance . . . and were baptized by him.

The second property of the viper is that it kills its parents by being born; hence it is said as though giving birth by force, and these men were similar. Below, which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? (Acts 7:52) [ you are the sons of those who killed the prophets. (Matt 23:31).]

The third reason is that the viper is exteriorly beautiful, but has poison within. These men were also exteriorly beautiful by a certain pretended justice, but had sins within; below, woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you are like whitened sepulchres, which outwardly appear beautiful to men, but within are full of dead men’s bones, and of all filthiness (Matt 23:27); and according to this the brood of vipers stands for evil.

Ambrose explains this in another way, and says that prudence is attributed to serpents; below, be you therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves (Matt 10:16). Hence John, commending these men for prudence, because they were coming to baptism, says, you brood of vipers.

265. So the first thing which incites one to penance is the recognition of one’s own sin; the second is the fear of divine judgment; by the fear of the Lord every one declines from evil (Prov 15:27); know you that there is judgment (Job 19:29). And this is what he says, who has showed you to flee from the wrath to come?

And one should know that Ambrose and Chrysostom explain this as about the past, Rabanus as about the future; hence he says, who will show you?

And according to Augustine, thus: brood, as though to say: who has shown you, so that you withdraw from evil? As though to say: no one but God. Show us, O Lord, your mercy; and grant us your salvation (Ps 84:8). According to Chrysostom, thus: brood of vipers, because they retain the will for sin, who has showed you to flee as you wish to? No, because Isaiah said: wash yourselves, be clean, take away the evil of your devices from my eyes (Isa 1:16). No, because David said: wash me yet more from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin, and afterward, a sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, you will not despise (Ps 1:4).

Rabanus explains it as about the future this way, as though he said: it is good that you do penance, because otherwise who will show you? Where will I go from thy spirit? Or where will I flee from your face? (Ps 138:7).

Wrath as it concerns God is not taken for an affection of the mind, but for an effect: hence his wrath is retribution.

266. These two incentives to penance having been premised, next the Evangelist concludes, bring forth therefore fruit worthy of penance. In a tree, the fruits come after the flowers, and if the fruits do not follow the flowers, that tree is of no use. For a certain flower of penance appears in contrition, but the fruit is in the carrying out of the penance. My flowers are the fruit of honor and riches (Sir 24:23).

And one should note that the fruit of justice is one thing, and the fruit of penance another; for more is required from the one repenting than from the one who does not sin. Moreover, there are three fruits worthy of penance. The first is that he punish in himself what he has committed, and this by the judgment of a priest. For after you converted me, I did penance: and after you showed unto me, I struck my thigh (Jer 31:19); i.e., I afflicted my body. The second is that he should flee from sin, and from the occasions of sin, hence it is said that to satisfy is to cut out the causes of sin. My son, have you sinned? Do so no more: but for your former sins also pray that they may be forgiven you. Flee from sins as from the face of a serpent (Sir 21:1–2). The third is that he should be as eager to do good as he was eager to sin. I speak an human thing, because of the infirmity of your flesh. For as you have yielded your members to serve uncleanness and iniquity, unto iniquity; so now yield your members to serve justice, unto sanctification (Rom 6:19).

267. Next, he removes an impediment to penance, when he says, and do not think to say within yourselves, we have Abraham for our father. There are two impediments to penance, presumptuousness about oneself, and despair of God’s judgment.

First, he removes the first;

second, the second, at for now the axe is laid to the root of the trees.

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he removes the impediment;

second, he gives the reason, at for I tell you.

268. He says then, and do not think to say within yourselves, we have Abraham for our father. These were of the race of Abraham according to the flesh, hence they might believe that, however much they sinned, God would have mercy on them for the sake of Abraham; why, O Lord, is your indignation enkindled against your people? (Exod 32:11). And later, remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, your servants. And so John excludes this: and do not think to say. And this is the manner of speaking; as though to say: do not say this, because it will be no use to you. As, Not they that are the children of the flesh, are the children of God; but they, that are the children of the promise, are accounted for the seed (Rom 9:8). For these men were glorying in Abraham, but the Lord says, if you are the children of Abraham, do the works of Abraham (John 8:39). Against such men Chrysostom says, what use is a famous lineage to a man whom behavior makes ugly? And this is also true in spiritual things.

269. Next, he gives the reason, for I tell you, for it is more to imitate a great father than to be born from him, God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham. It is said that when the people of Israel went across the Jordan with dry feet, Joshua commanded that twelve stones be taken from the bottom of the river and set up beside it, and twelve of the stones outside the river be placed within it, in memory of the miracle (Jos 4). And John, baptizing in that same place, points to these stones.

Now, this can be understood in two ways. First, to the letter: for this is the first foundation of faith, to believe in the omnipotence of God; I know that you can do all things, and no thought is hid from you (Job 42:2). Or we can understand by the stones the gentiles, who are called stones for two reasons: first, because they adore stones; second, because of their hardness. And although stones are hard, yet they retain an impression for a long time; and although a building made out of them is also made about slowly, yet it is strong, and durable. Hence the gentiles, although they were hardened as regards receiving the faith of Christ, yet they held it strongly. This is indicated by: and I will give them one heart, and will put a new spirit in their bowels: and I will take away the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of flesh (Ezek 11:19).

But according to Jerome, one seems in these words to be led to recall the prophecy, look unto Abraham your father, and to Sarah who bore you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and multiplied him (Isa 51:2). For he calls Abraham a rock on account of his inability to generate, and Sarah on account of her sterility; as though to say, God, who made Abraham able to generate, and Sarah fertile, is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones.

270. For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. For they could say: we do not believe that any wrath will come upon us; and so he removes this, saying, for now.

Hence, first, he sets out the judgment;

second, he sets out the sentence of the judgment.

271. He says then, for now. For people can be unwilling to repent in two ways: out of a despair of the judgment, because they do not believe that there is a judgment; I have enough to live on (Sir 5:1); flee then from the face of the sword, for the sword is the revenger of iniquities: and know that there is judgment (Job 19:29). But some, out of delay; the Lord delays not his promise, as some imagine, but deals patiently for your sake, not willing that any should perish, but that all should return to penance (2 Pet 3:9). But John excludes both. First, he excludes the first one, when he says, for now the axe; second, he excludes the second one when he says, is laid, as though to say, it will not delay.

272. And this is understood in three ways. Chrysostom says that by the axe is understood the strictness of the divine judgment, which sometimes is indicated through an axe, sometimes through a bow, and sometimes through a sword; except you will be converted, he will brandish his sword: he has bent his bow and made it ready (Ps 7:13).

Jerome: by the axe is understood the preaching of the Gospel, because as some are led to life by the teaching of the Gospel, so those who scorn are led to death. Are not my words as a fire, says the Lord: and as a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces? (Jer 23:29). Behold this child is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which will be contradicted (Luke 2:34). For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees, as though to say, it is in readiness to come.

According to Gregory, by the axe is understood our Redeemer, who is put together out of humanity and divinity as though out of a handle and iron; whose humanity, because it patiently awaits, is held, so to speak; and whose divinity cuts like iron. Therefore, the axe is laid to the root, because judgment comes through God and man.

273. And he says, is laid to the root, for two reasons. Because a universal cutting off of even what is in the branches happens at the root. Likewise, because what is cut off from the root does not sprout; as though to say, the uprooting of the evil will be universal.

It follows therefore, and first he sets down the universality, saying, every tree, as though to say: both Jews and gentiles; for there is no respect of persons with God (Rom 2:11). Likewise the guilt, because it does not bring forth fruit, for punishment only happens because of an omission; below, for I was hungry, and you gave me nothing to eat (Matt 25:42). Third, he sets out two punishments, and first a temporal one, will be cut down, that is, in this life; behold, for these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and I find none (Luke 13:7). Cut it done therefore, and later, why cumbers it the ground? And this is, will be cut down, with earthly prosperity. Next, he sets down an eternal punishment, hence it says, and cast into the fire; their worm will not die, and their fire will not be quenched: and they will be a loathsome sight to all flesh (Isa 66:24). And below, depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire (Matt 25:41).

274. I indeed baptize. Above, John exhorted them to the penance which should be accomplished; and now he aims to do what he had said frequently, namely to announce the kingdom of heaven. And concerning this he does two things:

first, he sets down the preparation for the kingdom;

second, he treats of the foretelling of the kingdom, at he who will come after me.

275. That kingdom is Christ, of whom it is said, for lo, the kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21). Certainly, the preparation is baptism; hence I indeed, what is marvelous to you, baptize in water alone, namely because I am simply a man. Hence he could wash nothing but the body, nor could he give the Holy Spirit, since the price for sin was not yet paid; without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins (Heb 9:22). Again, the Holy Spirit had not yet descended, nor had Christ sanctified the water by the touch of his body.

So why did he baptize? For three reasons. First, so that he might come before Christ, by baptizing; you will go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways (Luke 1:76). Second that, having gathered men together, he might have an opportunity to preach about Christ; that he may be made manifest in Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water (John 1:31). Third, to prepare for the baptism of Christ. It is customary in the Church that those who are to be baptized should first become catechumens, namely, that there should be a certain preparation, and they should receive a certain sign, through which they are reputed fit. And this is what he says, I baptize, namely that you who intend to be baptized by Christ may know yourselves to be ready.

276. Note that the Teacher says in chapter four of The Sentences that those baptized by John were not baptized by Christ, except for those who put their hope in John. But this is false; hence he says he will baptize you.

Again, note that Augustine raises a question. If they will be rebaptized after the baptism of John, why are men not rebaptized after the baptism of heretics?

One should say that John baptized in his own person, but heretics baptize in the person of Christ; hence it should be judged to be the baptism of Christ.

277. Next he treats of the kingdom. And

first he shows its dignity;

second, its office, at he will baptize you.

278. He says then, he who will come after me, in being born, baptizing, preaching, dying, descending into hell. But here he speaks of two things only, namely of preaching and baptism; hence he says, he who will come after me to baptize and to teach; and he will go before him in the spirit and power of Elias (Luke 1:17). Is mightier than I, and his baptism is mightier; there is none holy as the Lord is (1 Sam 2:2); if strength be demanded, he is most strong (Job 9:19). And lest someone should believe that there is a comparison between them, he says, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; as though to say, he is incomparably more deserving than I am, as Chrysostom explains it, such that I ought not even to show him service.

But one should know that it is not this way in the other three Gospels, because in those places it says to loose, while here it says to bear. Hence Augustine says that John wished to show his own humility and Christ’s excellence to this degree, and then the same thing is indicated in all the Gospels. Hence he says that it came about through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that in such matters the evangelists do not harmonize in words, so that we might accept the teaching; for we do not lie if we speak with the same sense as others do, even if we do not speak with the same words. If indeed he wished to signify some mystery, then there is a difference between Matthew and the others: and two things can be signified by the lace of a shoe, because the shoes signify humanity; into Edom will I stretch out my shoe (Ps 59:10). The lace is the union by which humanity is bound to the divinity. And because he did not consider himself sufficient to explain the mystery of the union, he said, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear. Or, it was the custom among the Jews (Deut 25:9) that if someone did not wish to accept the wife of his brother, he would have his lace untied by the man who accepted the wife. The spouse of Christ is the Church. So then John considered himself unworthy to accept the spouse of Christ.

279. Or in another way, following Hilary. Obviously, those carry a shoe who announce Christ’s humanity throughout the world, which was reserved for the apostles. How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that brings good tidings, and that preaches peace: of him that shows forth good, that preaches salvation (Isa 52:7). So John says that he is not worthy to bear the shoe which was reserved for the apostles; for to preach the Gospel is a greater office than to baptize; for Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel (1 Cor 1:17).

So were the apostles greater than John? Not by merit, but by having an office of the New Testament. And in this sense, it says below, yet he that is the lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he (Matt 11:11).

280. Or in another way, according to Chrysostom. The feet are the apostles and others of his slaves, among whom was John. The shoe is their weakness; because as the feet’s beauty is not known so long as they are covered by the shoe, so it is with the beauty of the apostles; gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may dwell in me (2 Cor 12:9). Whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; because neither he himself nor the apostles considered themselves worthy to be the ministers of the Gospel of Christ; and such confidence we have, through Christ, towards God. Not that we are sufficient to think any thing of ourselves, as of ourselves: but our sufficiency is from God (2 Cor 3:4–5).

So if the Gospels signify different things according to mystery, which of these did John say?

One should say, following Augustine, that if John’s words are referred to different things, in this way he said both. Or that John, preaching to the crowds, sometimes said this thing, sometimes another.

281. Next he treats of the office of Christ. And

first, of the office of baptizing;

second, of the office of judging, at whose fan is in his hand.

282. He says then, he will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire. Many books have and of fire, but they speak in the fashion of the Greeks, who lack an ablative. And he says, Holy Spirit and fire, in which one is given to understand that the baptism of Christ has more than the baptism of John, because it adds something beyond it, for Christ baptizes in water and the Spirit; amen, amen I say to you, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:5).

But note that when he says, he will baptize you in the Holy Spirit, he implies that the abundance of the Holy Spirit will be had, which completely cleanses the ones who have it; you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5). He also implies an easy transformation.

283. And fire. This is explained in many ways. Jerome says that the same thing is indicated by the Holy Spirit and by fire; I am come to cast fire on the earth; and what will I, but that it be kindled? (Luke 12:49), i.e., the Holy Spirit. And so also he appeared in fire; and there appeared to them parted tongues as it were of fire (Acts 2:3).

According to Chrysostom, by fire is signified the present affliction, which purges sins; the furnace tries the potter’s vessels, and the trial of affliction just men (Sir 27:6). But one should know that he says that this baptism is necessary, because the baptism of the Holy Spirit restrains the mind, lest it be overcome by temptation, but it does not entirely take away the buds of the flesh; and so affliction is necessary, because the flesh then hardened does not bud forth into concupiscence. Hence the fire which repairs the flesh is necessary. Or, by fire is understood the purgation to come in purgatory; the fire will try every man’s work, of what sort it is (1 Cor 3:13).

However, Hilary explains this as about the fire of hell, and says that he intends two things in what he says here, he will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire, namely the salvation which he will bring about in the present and in the future. In the future he will purge by the fire of hell, insofar as he draws the evil; and this harmonizes with what follows, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.

284. Next, he treats of the judiciary power, whose fan is in his hand. And first, he touches upon the judiciary power; second, the effect of the judgment; third, the manner of the judgment.

He says then whose fan, and he uses a likeness. The floor is the Church; the fruits are the faithful, who will be gathered together by the angels; pray therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send laborers into his harvest (Luke 10:2); of him who sent me, that I may perfect his work (John 4:34). The fan is Christ’s judiciary power, which separates the wheat from the chaff; for neither does the Father judge any man, but has given all judgment to the Son (John 5:22); it is he who was appointed by God, to be judge of the living and of the dead (Acts 10:42).

285. He will thoroughly cleanse, i.e., he will cleanse perfectly. First, through the afflictions which are as it were a certain wind, without which the chaff is with the wheat. Thus also as long as they are in the Church, the good are not distinguished from the bad; and just as by a small wind the fine chaff is driven out, and by a strong wind the coarse chaff is driven out, so in the Church, if affliction increases, even those who seem strong fall; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation, they fall away (Luke 8:13). Second, by the decisions of prelates, namely when they excommunicate; put away the evil one from among yourselves (1 Cor 5:3). Third, in the day of judgment, when the good will be separated from the evil; below, and gather his wheat i.e., the elect, into the barn (Matt 3:12), i.e., paradise; save us, O Lord, our God: and gather us from among nations (Ps 105:47). But the chaff he will burn.

286. And notice that there is a difference between chaff and weeds; for the seed of chaff is one thing and the seed of weeds another, because chaff is of the same seed as wheat. Hence by weeds we can understand schismatics, who do not join with us in the sacraments; by chaff we can understand those who are faithful, although evil. But both will be burned by fire. With unquenchable fire; and their fire will not be quenched (Isa 66:24).

And he says, unquenchable, to distinguish it from the fire of purgatory. Concerning this fire, it says below, depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire (Matt 25:41).

Christ is baptized

3:13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan, unto John, to be baptized by him. [n. 288]

3:14 But John prevented him, saying: I ought to be baptized by you, and you come to me? [n. 292]

3:15 And Jesus answering, said to him: suffer it to be so now. For so it becomes us to fulfill all justice. Then he allowed him. [n. 293]

3:16 And Jesus being baptized, immediately came out of the water: and behold, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. [n. 296]

3:17 And behold a voice from heaven, saying: this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. [n. 302]

287. Above, the Evangelist introduced John the Baptist; now he introduces Christ, coming to the baptism of John.

And concerning this, he does two things:

first, he sets down those things preceding the baptism;

second, those things following the baptism, at and Jesus, being baptized.

Concerning the first, he sets down four things:

first, the marvelous humility of Christ;

second, the astonishment at this humility;

third, Christ’s satisfaction of this astonishment;

fourth, John agrees to the satisfaction.

The second is at but John prevented him; the third at and Jesus, answering; the fourth at then he allowed him.

Concerning the first, he sets down four things: the time, the people, the place, and the office.

288. The time, when he says, then, namely when John had his own light. For as the sun shines while the morning star is still visible, so Christ comes while John is preaching and baptizing (Luke 3:21). Can you bring forth the day star in its time, and make the evening star to rise upon the children of the earth? (Job 38:32). Or, then, when Christ was in his thirtieth year (Luke 3:23), that one may be given to understand that one ought not to take up the office of preaching and of leadership before the perfect age. Or, then, when, if he had followed the course of life which others do, he could have committed many sins. Hence he did not wish to be baptized at once, but observed the law for a long time, as though constituted under the law, and so that the Jews would not have a cause for scandal; for he did not come to destroy the law (Matt 5:17). But it could seem to someone that Christ had ended the law, because he had not been able to fulfill the law, and so he willed to observe it for a long time; and this is why he was not baptized so quickly.

289. The persons are set down when he says, then Jesus came . . . unto John, the Lord to the servant, the Creator to the creature; below, learn from me, because I am meek, and humble of heart (Matt 11:29).

290. The place, from Galilee. This fits mystically with having been baptized, because Galilee signifies ‘transmigration’: for it is necessary that those who are baptized transmigrate from vices to virtues; wherefore laying away all malice, and all guile, and dissimulations, and envies, and all detractions (1 Pet 2:1).

Likewise, to the Jordan. The Jordan is interpreted as ‘descent’, and signifies humility, which the baptized should have in order to obtain grace. And gives grace to the humble (Jas 4:6).

291. The office is set down at to be baptized. God willed to be baptized by John for four reasons. First, so that the baptism of John might be preserved, since there were other men detracting from it (Matt 21:24). Second, so that by his touch he might consecrate all the water; and this is why baptism is said to be carried from the fount of the Savior; you will draw waters with joy out of the savior’s fountains (Isa 12:3). Third, that he might point out that he bore the true condition of a man in himself, because as he was made in the likeness of the body of sin (Rom 8:3), so he wished to be cleansed as though a sinner. Fourth, so that he might impose upon others the necessity of baptizing; for he wished first to observe what he imposed; Jesus began to do and to teach (Acts 1:1), contrary to those of whom it is said below, for they bind heavy and insupportable burdens, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but with a finger of their own they will not move them (Matt 23:4).

292. Next is set down the astonishment.

And note three things: first, John refused the honor offered to him; second, he confessed his own humility; third, his own weakness. The second is at but John prevented him; seek not of the Lord a pre-eminence, nor of the king the seat of honor (Sir 7:4). The third is at I ought to be baptized by you.

For he knew that he would baptize interiorly; and this is why he says, to be baptized, i.e., to be cleansed from original sin. So says the Gloss.

And you come to me? Your knowledge is become wonderful to me: it is high, and I cannot reach it (Ps 138:6).

293. Next, Christ’s satisfaction is set down. Notice that John had done one thing, because he prevented him; and he had said two things: I ought to be baptized by you, and you come to me? And yet Christ did not respond to the first of those, namely to I ought to be baptized by you, but rather he responded to the fact that he prevented him; hence, suffer it to be so now.

And he says, now, because, according to Chrysostom, John was baptized by Christ afterwards, not only with the baptism of wind, but also of water. Or now, he says, because afterwards John was baptized with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Or now, so that I may be baptized with the baptism of water, because I have to be baptized with another baptism, namely the baptism of the passion; and I have a baptism wherewith I am to be baptized: and how am I straitened until it be accomplished? (Luke 12:50). And John also was baptized by Christ with this baptism, insofar as he died for justice, which is the same as to die for Christ. Or, now, while I bear the form of a slave, fulfill in me the office of humility; because when I will appear in glory, then I will baptize you with the baptism of glory.

294. Next, Christ responds to this astonishment, and says, for so it becomes us to fulfill all justice, which can be explained in three ways. First, so it becomes us to fulfill all justice, namely by baptism; for it was going to happen that Christ would fulfill all justice, both of law and of nature; but he wished to fulfill all justice by this path, because without baptism justice is not fulfilled; amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God (John 3:3).

Remigius explains it this way: for so it becometh us to fulfill all justice. It becomes me to give an example of this sacrament, in which the plenitude of all justice is given, because the plenitude of grace and of the other virtues is given in this sacrament; the river of God is filled with water (Ps 64:10), that is, with grace.

Or in this way: for so it becomes us, that is, it becomes me to have perfect humility. The first step of humility is not to put oneself above one’s equal, and to subject oneself to one’s superior, which indeed is necessary. The second step is when one subjects oneself to one’s equal. But perfect humility is when the one who is superior subjects himself to his inferior; and this is for so it becomes us, that is, to fulfill perfect humility.

295. But although there was a dispute between them, Christ won. Hence, then he allowed him, that is, John permitted that he should be baptized by him. The Gloss: that humility is true which does not lack obedience; for stubbornly to resist is arrogance. It is . . . like the crime of idolatry, to refuse to obey (1 Sam 15:23), for thus Jeremiah and Moses are praised, who finally consented.

296. Next, when he says, and Jesus being baptized, immediately came out of the water, he sets down four things following upon the baptism. And one should know that just as Christ in his baptism gave an example of baptizing others, so in the things which followed he let it be understood that we should pursue baptism. Now, there are four things which follow, namely Christ’s coming out, the opening of heaven, the appearance of the Holy Spirit, and the testimony of the Father.

297. The first is at and Jesus being baptized, immediately came out of the water. And, literally, he says this because the river had deep hollows. Yet by this is signified that those who are baptized ascend through good works. And he says immediately because those baptized in Christ immediately put on Christ; for as many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ (Gal 3:27). Likewise, they gain a heavenly inheritance; who according to his great mercy has regenerated us unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, unto an inheritance incorruptible (1 Pet 1:3–4); and this is and behold, the heavens were opened. This is not to be understood in a bodily way, but as a vision of the imagination.

298. And behold, the heavens were opened. And this signifies that heaven was closed to the human race by sin; he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life (Gen 3:24). It says that he placed a Seraphim, but it was opened by Christ.

But it is asked, why were the heavens opened, since they were always open to him?

And one should say, according to Chrysostom, that the Evangelist speaks according to the common manner of speech, because by the merit of his baptism the heavens were opened to us; just as a king says to a friend who begs a favor on behalf of another, I grant this to you.

And one should know that there three kinds of men who fly up to heaven immediately after death: the baptized, as here; martyrs, behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God (Acts 7:55); and those who carry through with penitence to the end; it is said that the heaven was opened to Peter while he prayed (Acts 10:19).

299. Next, the appearance of the Holy Spirit is set down; hence, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. This is what belongs to the baptized, who receives the Holy Spirit into himself; that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit (John 3:6), i.e., is spiritual. And he saw, not by a vision of the imagination, otherwise only he would have seen it, the Spirit of God, i.e., the dove.

And one should know that nothing bodily is said of God according to his own substance, but either by a vision of the imagination, I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated (Isa 6:1), or by signification, and the rock was Christ (1 Cor 10:4), or by assumption into the unity of person, the Word was made flesh (John 1:14). But the Holy Spirit is called a dove in none of those ways. That it was not by a vision of the imagination is clear, because the vision was seen commonly by all. It was not by signification, because he had not been visible at first. It was not by an assumption into the unity of person. And therefore it was in a fourth way, which is when some appearance is newly formed for the representation of divine effects, as when the Lord appeared in fire and bramble (Exod 3:2); and in legislation, in lightnings, and thunder (Exod 19:16). Hence the dove was to represent the inflowing of the Holy Spirit; and this is and he saw the Spirit of God descending.

300. Moreover, he appeared in the form of a dove for four reasons. First, owing to its charity; for the dove is an amorous animal. Chrysostom: the servant of the devil also has in pretense all the other gifts which the servant of God has in truth; only the love of the Holy Spirit the unclean spirit cannot imitate. As: open to me, my sister, my love, my dove, my undefiled (Song 5:2). Second, owing to its innocence and simplicity; below, be therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves (Matt 10:16). Third, because the dove has a groan for a song; and the man sanctified by the Holy Spirit should groan because of sins; her bondwomen were led away mourning as doves, murmuring in their hearts (Nah 2:7). Fourth, owing to its fertility. Hence also it was commanded in the law that they offer a dove; and this pertains to the baptized, because that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit (John 3:6).

Descending as a dove. The flowing out of divine gifts from God into any creature whatsoever is always through a descent; because the creature cannot receive them except through a descent into that creature; every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights (Jas 1:17).

301. And coming upon him. Note: a visible sending is always the sign of an invisible sending, and it signifies either a newly received grace or the increase of grace; just as in the apostles, when the Holy Spirit appeared in tongues, it signified the increase of grace. Likewise, such a sending signifies either a grace then made, or a grace made before. Now, in Christ it did not signify a new effect, because he was full of grace and truth from the moment of his conception; but rather the grace which was upon him before was insofar as he was man, not insofar as he was God.

302. Next, when he says, and behold a voice from heaven, saying, the testimony of the Father is set down: this is my beloved Son.

Note that baptism not only makes men spiritual, but even makes them sons of God; he gave them power to be made the sons of God (John 1:12).

And one should know that this voice expressed, as it were, that which the dove signified. Beloved, not like other creatures (Wis 2:13), but as a natural Son; for the Father loves the Son, and shows him all things which he himself does: and greater works than these will he show him, that you may wonder (John 5:20). A Psalm also indicates this: the Lord has said to me: you are my Son, this day have I begotten you (Psalm 2:7).

But since the saints are also loved by him, he adds Son, by which he distinguishes the Son, according to one understanding, from others. In whom I am well pleased. For in whatever someone’s goodness shines out, something in it pleases him, just as a builder pleases himself by his own beautiful work of art, and just as when a man sees his own beautiful image in a mirror. The divine goodness is in each particular creature, but the perfect whole is never present except in the Son and the Holy Spirit; and therefore the whole does not please him except in the Son, who has just as much goodness as the Father; and this is in whom, i.e., I please myself well in him; the Father loves the Son: and he has given all things into his hand (John 3:35).

303. But note that there seems to be a certain contrariety between this Evangelist and the others, because Mark and Luke say, you are my beloved Son (Mark 1:11: Luke 3:22); but Matthew, this is my beloved Son, and they say, in you. But the thought is the same, because when it says, you are, this seems to be said directly to Christ; but he spoke for the sake of the others, because Christ was certain of the Father’s love. And so Matthew expresses the intention of the one speaking, and says, this is. Hence he represents it as though said to the others; so Augustine said.

304. Similarly, it is asked why Matthew and Mark say, in whom, but Luke says, in you. Augustine says that in the Son the Father pleases both himself and men. So because of this, in whom indicates that he pleases himself in men. Hence let him please others for me, i.e., to my honor, because those seeing the Son have glorified the Father. Or according to either sense: in whom I am well pleased, i.e., it pleased me to complete the salvation of men; and this is in you i.e., through you.

305. And note that in this baptism not only the end and fruit is represented, but also the form of baptism, which is in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19). For the Son was there in the flesh, the Father in the voice, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove.

And note that the fact that these manifestations were formed separately does not regard the division of one person’s operation from the rest of the Trinity, since, as the essence is common, so is the operation; but this is said because of a certain appropriation, for the whole Trinity both created the dove and the flesh; but these things are referred back to different persons.

Beginning of Christ’s Mission

Christ’s temptation

4:1 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert, to be tempted by the devil. [n. 307]

4:2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, afterwards he was hungry. [n. 312]

4:3 And the tempter coming said to him: if you are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread. [n. 316]

4:4 Who answered and said: it is written, not in bread alone does man live, but in every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. [n. 319]

4:5 Then the devil took him up into the holy city, and set him upon the pinnacle of the temple, [n. 321]

4:6 and said to him: if you are the Son of God, cast yourself down, for it is written: that he has given his angels charge over you, and in their hands will they bear you up, lest perhaps you offend your foot against a stone. [n. 329]

4:7 Jesus said to him: it is written again: you shall not tempt the Lord your God. [n. 333]

4:8 Again the devil took him up onto a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them, [n. 334]

4:9 and said to him: all these will I give you, if falling down you will adore me. [n. 338]

4:10 Then Jesus said to him: begone, satan: for it is written, the Lord your God shall you adore, and him only shall you serve. [n. 340]

4:11 Then the devil left him; and behold angels came and ministered to him. [n. 345]

306. Above, it was shown that Christ prepared himself for teaching by receiving baptism; and now, by overcoming temptation.

Concerning this, he does two things:

first, the victory which he won over temptation is set down;

second, how he called disciples to hear the teaching, at and Jesus walking by the Sea of Galilee (Matt 4:18).

Concerning the first, he does three things:

first he puts forth a certain preface about temptation;

second is set down an assult of temptation, at and the temptor coming to him said.

third is the victory, at there the devil left him.

Moreover, three preambles are set down, namely the place, the fast, and the experience of hunger.

As regards the first, four things are touched upon: the time and place, the one leading, and the goal of this leading.

307. The time was then, namely when it had already been declared by the paternal voice that he was the Son of God. In which one is given to understand that this temptation threatens those who have been made sons of God through baptism; son, when you come to the service of God, stand in justice and in fear, and prepare your soul for temptation (Sir 2:1).

That desert was between Jerusalem and Jericho, where many were being killed, concerning which see: a certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, who also stripped him, and having wounded him went away, leaving him half dead (Luke 10:30).

308. And note five reasons why someone is tempted after receiving spiritual grace. First, so that he may receive experience of his justice; what does he know, who has not been tried? (Sir 34:9). Second, to prevent arrogance; and lest the greatness of the revelations should exalt me, there was given me a sting of my flesh, an angel of satan, to buffet me (2 Cor 12:7). Third, to confound the devil, so that he may know how great is the strength of Christ, so great that he is not able to overcome it. An example of this is given: have you considered my servant Job? (Job 1:8). Fourth, so that he may be made stronger, just as a soldier is made strong by experience; that afterwards their children might learn to fight with their enemies, and to be trained up to war (Judg 3:1). Fifth, so that he may know his own dignity; because when the devil attacks someone, it results in honor, since the devil attacks those who are holy; he eats grass . . . and he trusts that the Jordan may run into his mouth (Job 40:10, 18).

309. There follows about the place, then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert. This fits both with what came before and with what follows, because it was fitting that he should go into the desert after baptism. This is signified in the Israelite people, who after the crossing of the Red Sea, which was a figure of baptism, came into the land of promise through the desert and the wilderness. The baptized should seek solitude and quiet in this way, leaving the world behind either in body or in mind; behold I will allure her, and will lead her into the wilderness: and I will speak to her heart (Hos 2:14). Lo, I have gone far off flying away; and I abode in the wilderness (Ps 54:8).

For it was fitting that he should go out into the desert, as though to a one-on-one combat with the devil. Chrysostom: that man goes into the desert who escapes beyond the boundaries, i.e., the will, of the body and of the world, where there is no place for temptation. For how is he tempted by lust, who is with a wife the whole day? But those who do not escape from the will of the flesh and the world are not sons of God, but sons of the devil, who even when they have their own wife desire another; but the sons of God, having the Holy Spirit, are led into the desert, that they may be tempted with Christ, about whom there follows:

310. led by the Spirit, understand the word Holy.

But he who leads is greater than he who is led. Therefore the Holy Spirit is greater than Christ.

One should respond: if this be referred to Jesus insofar as he is the Son of God, in this way he is equal with the Holy Spirit. And someone can lead another either by command, and in this way he is greater, or by exhortation, and in this way he is equal; Andrew led Peter to Jesus (John 1:40). And in this way Jesus was led. Hilary refers this to Christ insofar as he is a man; that is, the Holy Spirit exposed to temptation the man whom he had filled.

For men are led by the Holy Spirit when they are moved by charity, because in this way they are not moved by their own proper motion, but by another, because they follow the impulse of charity; for the charity of Christ presses us (2 Cor 5:14). And in this way the sons of God are led by the Holy Spirit, so that they may cross through the time of this life, which is full of temptation, the life of man upon earth is a warfare (Job 7:1), with victory by the strength of Christ.

311. He himself willed to be tempted, so that just as he conquered our death by his own, so he might overcome all our temptations by his temptation; for we do not have a high priest who cannot have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin (Heb 4:15).

Gregory says that there are three steps of temptation, namely suggestion, delight, and consent. The first is from the outside, and can be present without sin; the second is from the inside, in which there begins to be sin; which indeed is perfected by consent. The first step could be present in Christ, but not the others.

And note that the devil would not have dared to approach to tempt Christ, unless Christ had first approached him.

312. Next, the second preamble is set down, namely the fast, and when he had fasted, which fits both with the past and with the future: the past, because one fittingly fasts after baptism, since there is no leisure to be idle after baptism, but one should practice good works; for you, brethren, have been called unto liberty (Gal 5:13), but there is no true liberty in pursuing a carnal life.

Likewise, it fits with the future that he who was about to be tempted by the devil should hunger, because this kind is not cast out except by prayer and fasting (Matt 17:20).

Forty days. This should be understood literally. And he adds and forty nights lest someone should think that he was allowed to eat at night, as the Saracens do.

313. And one should know that this number is prefigured in the Old Testament in Moses and Elias (Exod 24:18: 1 Kgs 19:8). And a mystery is hidden in this, because such a number arises from ten multiplied by four. The ten signifies the law, because the whole law is contained in ten precepts. The four signifies the composition of the body, because the body is composed out of four elements. Since therefore we transgress the divine law at the suggestion of the body, it is just that we afflict our body for forty days.

Further, according to Gregory, this number is set up by the Church for fasting, because this way we spend a tenth part of the whole year: for from the first Sunday to Easter there are thirty-six fasting days, which are a tenth part of the year, six days being excluded. And for this reason the middle days were added by certain men in ancient times, who fasted until the midnight of the holy Sabbath.

314. Third, it adds that afterwards he was hungry. This is not written about Moses and Elias, who were men; but Christ desired to hunger, to demonstrate his humanity, because otherwise the devil would not have dared to approach to tempt him. Being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man (Phil 2:7).

315. Next, the attack of temptation is set down; and it is threefold.

First, concerning gluttony;

second, concerning vainglory;

third, concerning ambition;

He treats the second at, then the devil took him up into the holy city. And the third at, again the devil took him up onto a very high mountain.

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he shows the attack of the devil;

second, how Christ responded, at who answered.

316. And the tempter coming said. For he was able to bring it about that he should approach Jesus in some bodily form.

And there are three temptations, for God tempts in order to instruct; God tempted Abraham (Gen 22:1). Sometimes a man tempts in order to learn, as the queen of Saba tested Solomon, where it says of her, and the queen of Saba, having heard of the fame of Solomon in the name of the Lord, came to try him with hard questions (1 Kgs 10:1). The devil tempts in order to deceive; lest perhaps he that tempts should have tempted you, and our labor should be made vain (1 Thess 3:5). Whoever wants to test something concerning science, first tests about the most general things. Now, the most common vices of the whole human race are the vices of the body, and principally gluttony. Again, he who wishes to besiege a castle begins at the weakest part; now a man has two parts, the bodily and the spiritual. The devil always tempts from the weaker part, and hence he tempts first concerning the bodily vices, as is evident in the first parent, whom he first tempted concerning gluttony.

317. But one should note his marvelous cunning in tempting: if you are the Son of God; for he tempted so directly concerning one thing, because he was tempting indirectly concerning another. Hence in the case of the first man he suggested that he eat of the tree, which pertained to a bodily sin directly; but he secretly led him on to arrogance and greed, which are spiritual sins. Hence he said, you will be as gods (Gen 3:5). Thus in the case of Christ, he had heard that the Christ was to come into the world, and this man seemed to be the Son of God; but he had come in a state of uncertainty, wondering whether this man was he of whom it had been prophesied, because he found nothing in him; for the prince of this world comes, and in me he has not any thing (John 14:30).

Hence he suggested that which is delightful to a hungry man, and likewise he led him on to desire the things of God; and this is if you are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread. His word is full of power (Eccl 8:4); and: by the word of the Lord the heavens were established; and all the power of them by the spirit of his mouth (Ps 32:6). So he was able to change a stone by his word. Therefore he wished to incline him toward this deed, which if he had done, he would have known him to be the Son of God; if not, he was leading him toward arrogance.

318. And one should note that there are many men who consent to bodily sins, reckoning that they should not lose the spiritual state. But if a man were not to lose spirituality by the fact that he is tempted and consents, the temptation would be a trivial one. Thus the devil wished to persuade the woman, and Christ, promising spiritual things.

319. Who answered and said: it is written, ‘not in bread alone does man live’. Three lessons are given in this reply, which the one tempted should follow.

First, that one should turn back to the medicine of Scripture; your words have I hidden in my heart, that I may not sin against you (Ps 118:11). Hence he said, it is written.

The second lesson is that a man should do nothing according to the judgment of the devil. Vegetius: the wise king should never do anything according to the judgment of his enemy, even if it seems good. And therefore the Lord, while he was able to change the stones into bread without sin, did not want to, because the devil suggested it.

The third is that one should not perform useless work just to show his own strength, because this is vanity.

320. Who answered and said: it is written, ‘not in bread alone does man live.’

One should notice that the devil presses for two things: first, to lead him into a desire for fleshly things, and likewise into presumption. Against both, however, Christ first avoids boasting: as though to say, you call me the Son of God; I call myself a man; hence, ‘not in bread alone does man live.’ Likewise, the devil drew him toward a desire for fleshly things: command that these stones become bread. Here he draws himself to a desire for spiritual things: ‘but in every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’ As though to say: the bodily life is not so much to be desired as the spiritual life, which is preserved by spiritual food, ‘but in every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’ Lord, to whom will we go? You have the words of eternal life (John 6:69); your justifications I will never forget: for by them you have given me life (Ps 118:93).

And he says, ‘in every word’, because all spiritual teaching is from God, whether it is spoken by man or by God. And again, ‘from the mouth’, because the preacher is the mouth of God; and if you will separate the precious from the vile, you will be as my mouth (Jer 15:19).

Or in another way: ‘not in bread alone’, i.e., man does not live only by bread, but also by the word, i.e., the command of God can preserve one without any food.

321. Then the devil took him up into the holy city. The first temptation having been set down, now the second is set down, namely concerning vainglory. And the order is fitting, because after the devil saw himself defeated in bodily vice, he tempted concerning vainglory, or pride, because pride lies in ambush for good works, that they may be destroyed, as Augustine says in his Regula.

Concerning this temptation, then, he does three things:

first, the place of the temptation is set down;

second, the attack or attempt of temptation, at if you are the Son of God, cast yourself down;

third, the Christ’s resistance, at Jesus said to him.

322. But one should know that Luke sets down the third temptation here the other way around; but there is no force to this objection, according to Augustine, because everything told here is also told in Luke, nor is it set down here or in Luke which one happened first or second. Rabanus indeed says that Luke attends to the order of history, and so he set this down in order in which it happened. Matthew however followed the nature of the temptation, because after the temptation concerning gluttony, and concerning vainglory, there follows the temptation concerning ambition. For Adam was tempted in this way: first, concerning gluttony, hence: for in whatever day you will eat of it, thou will die the death (Gen 2:17); second, concerning glory, you will be as Gods (Gen 3:5); third, concerning greed, or ambition, knowing good and evil.

323. But why does it say, then the devil took him up? For this word took implies force.

And Jerome responds that the Evangelist says this according to the devil’s opinion, because what Christ put up with out of virtue, the devil took as though he had done by his own power.

324. He says, the holy city, either because holy things were done there, namely the temporal sacrifices, and suchlike, or he says it because of the holiness of the fathers of those who were there. Hence he calls it holy by an ancient custom, although it ceased to be so; how is the faithful city, that was full of judgment, become a harlot? (Isa 1:21). But later it says, after this you will be called the city of the just, a faithful city (Isa 1:26).

325. But one should know that it is said: he was in the desert forty days and forty nights, and was being tempted by satan (Mark 1:13), on the basis of which it seems that all the temptations happened in the desert. Therefore what is said here does not seem to be true, then the devil took him up.

And there are two responses to this. Some say that all the temptations happened in the desert, and that they happened according to a vision of the imagination, namely that Christ was imagining it to be so, he himself permitting it. Others say that they happened according to a bodily vision, and that the devil appeared to him in a bodily form. This seems to be implied, because it says that the devil took him up into the holy city. Some say that this related to the desert, because Jerusalem was deserted by God.

But one should say better that what is said in Mark is not to be understood such that all the temptations happened in the desert, nor does he even say that, but that he was tempted by satan (Mark 1:13). And so one should know that the first temptation was in the desert, the other two outside the desert.

326. But it is asked how he was taken up. They say that he carried him upon himself. Others say, and better, that he induced him to go by exhortation; and Christ went into Jerusalem by the arrangement of his own wisdom.

327. And set him upon the pinnacle of the temple. One should know that it is written that Solomon made the temple with three stories and a flat roof, and a certain pinnacle next to the temple through which men could go up (1 Kgs 6). And it says here about this pinnacle, and set him upon the pinnacle of the temple. Now, whether he went into the first, or the second, or the third, is not said here; but it is certain that he went up something.

328. But would not men have seen when the devil carried Christ?

It should be said, according to those who say that he carried him, that Christ made it happen by his own power that he could not be seen. Or it should be said that the devil was in the figure of a man, and it was normal that men should go up in this way.

329. And said to him: if you are the Son of God, cast yourself down. The devil always strikes with two arrows: for on the one hand he leads him to vainglory, on the other hand to homicide; and this is if you are the Son of God, cast yourself down.

But certainly this sequence of actions did not fit with Christ, because it befit Christ to ascend; and no man has ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven (John 3:13). And he says, cast, because his intention is always to throw down, just as he himself was thrown down; and his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth (Rev 12:4).

The devil also knew his own weakness, because no one but the willing is conquered by him; hence he says, cast, not fall; bow down, that we may go over (Isa 51:23).

330. But why upon the pinnacle? The Gloss: because they were teaching in that place. Hence it signifies that the devil tempts the great concerning vainglory. Against which the Apostle says, nor sought we glory of men, neither of you, nor of others (1 Thess 2:6). And he says, cast yourself down, because men who seek glory must, to that degree, convince others that they display the sonship of God as humble in many things; and for this reason Cicero says in the book On Offices: the desire of glory should be avoided, for it steals away that liberty of soul for which every struggle of the great souled man should be.

331. Next, the devil brings in a Scriptural text, for it is written. And he uses this text not to teach, but to deceive; and this argument is taken up, because just as he transforms himself into an angel of light, so also do his servants, who use the authority of Sacred Scripture to deceive the simple; which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Pet 3:16). Hence the devil prefigures this in himself, as in the head. ‘That he has given his angels charge over you.’

332. Note that someone may twist the authority of Sacred Scripture in three ways. Sometimes as when it speaks about one thing, and is explained as about another, like if it speaks about one just man, and is explained as about Christ; e.g., he that could have transgressed, and has not transgressed: and could do evil things, and has not done them (Sir 31:10). Likewise, the Father is greater than I (John 14:28), this is said of Christ according as he is a man. Hence if it is explained of him according as he is the Son of God, the Scriptural text is twisted. The devil speaks here of the ‘angels’ in this way, because the Psalm says this about the members of Christ (Ps 90), who need the protection of the angels, which is clear, because it adds below, ‘lest perhaps you offend’; for this cannot be said of Christ, because he could not have given offense by occasion of some sin.

The second way a Scriptural text is twisted is when someone brings in a text to something for which it is not a text; like Proverbs and: but if your enemy be hungry, give him to eat; if he thirst, give him to drink (Prov 25:21: Rom 12:20). For if someone does this to someone so that he will be punished by God, he does this contrary to the sense of the text. The devil did exactly this, because the Scriptures meant that the just man is protected by the angels in such a way that he does not fall into danger; a helper in due time in tribulation (Ps 9:10). But the devil expounds it that a man should throw himself into danger, which is to tempt God.

The third way is when someone accepts from the Scriptural text what is in his favor, and dismisses that which is contrary to him, which is the custom of heretics. Thus the devil does here, because he dismissed that which is added below, which was against him, namely, you will walk upon the asp and the basilisk: and you will trample under foot the lion and the dragon (Ps 90:13). Hence he is made the exemplar of all twisting of the Scriptures.

333. Jesus said to him. He defends himself, not by violence, but by wisdom; no evil can overcome wisdom (Wis 7:30). And so he sets against this Scriptural text a second Scriptural text which explains the one before; as though to say, you say that I should throw myself down, that I may see whether God will save me; but this is prohibited in the Scriptures. Hence, you shall not tempt the Lord your God (Deut 6:16).

Or in another way, you tempt, and by tempting you act against the Scriptural text; but he who acts against the Scriptural text should not use the authority of Sacred Scripture. And Scripture says, ‘you shall not tempt.’ But you tempt the Lord your God, whom I am; you call me Master, and Lord; and you say well, for so I am (John 13:13). Yet the first is more literal.

334. Next, the third temptation is set down, namely concerning ambition, or concerning greed; hence, again the devil took him up. And

the attack of the temptation is set down;

second, Christ’s resistance, at then Jesus said to him: begone, satan.

Now, the devil tempts in two ways, by deed and by word; hence, all these will I give you.

In the deed, there are two things to be considered, because

first, he takes him up onto the mountain;

second, he shows him all the kingdoms of the world.

335. He says then, again the devil took him up. The taking up was discussed above; but this, namely onto a very high mountain, can be explained in two ways. Rabanus says that this mountain was in the desert, because according to him all the temptations happened in the desert. It is called high in comparison to the others which were in the area.

But Chrysostom says that he led him to the highest mountain in the world; and this seems to correspond with the text, since it says very high. Moreover, in this is signified that the devil always rouses one to pride, just as he himself is proud; give glory to the Lord your God, before it is dark, and before your feet stumble upon the dark mountains (Jer 13:16). Hence it also says mountain; for behold I will call together all the families of the kingdoms of the north: says the Lord (Jer 1:15).

336. And showed him all the kingdoms of the world.

One should know that the kingdom of the world is taken in two ways. First, spiritually; and thus the devil is said to reign in it. Now is the judgment of the world: now will the prince of this world be cast out (John 12:31). Second, the kingdom of the world is said literally, according as one man reigns over another.

To some, what is said here seems to be said about the kingdom of the devil; hence, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world, namely over which he was reigning, and the glory of them, because when he reigns perfectly over men, he makes them to glory as well. Who are glad when they have done evil, and rejoice in most wicked things (Prov 2:14); why do you glory in malice, you who are mighty in iniquity? (Ps 51:3). And this is the last step of sin.

Others explain this as about a bodily kingdom.

337. But then it is asked how he could show him all the kingdoms of the world.

Remigius says that it was miraculous, because he showed all the kingdoms in a sweep of the eye, just as it is written about Blessed Benedict, that the whole world was shown to him in one glance.

But one should know that these two do not seem to be good explanations, because then it would not be necessary to say that the devil took him up into a very high mountain; because all this could have happened in a valley. Hence Chrysostom says otherwise: showed him, not that he showed him the particular kingdoms, but at what part a particular kingdom would be; and not only this, but he showed the glory of them, i.e., he expressed to him the temporal glory of the world. I will change their glory into shame (Hos 4:7); whose glory is in their shame; who mind earthly things (Phil 3:19).

338. And said to him: all these will I give you, if falling down you will adore me. He does two things in these words: he promises one thing, and asks for another: in the promise is a lie; in the request, pride.

In the first temptation, the devil had investigated whether he was the Son of God; and believing he had discovered that he was not, he says, all these will I give you; here is the lie, because these were not in his power. By me kings reign, and lawgivers decree just things (Prov 8:15). Till the living know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men; and he will give it to whomever it will please him (Dan 4:14); otherwise he would not have said, all these will I give you, for no evil man reigns except by divine permission. Who makes a man that is a hypocrite to reign for the sins of the people? (Job 34:30).

He asks for another thing. Hence, if falling down you will adore me.

339. Notice three things. First, that the devil persists in that which he desired at the beginning; I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit in the mountain of the covenant, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the height of the clouds, I will be like the Most High (Isa 14:13–14). And on account of this he leads men to idolatry, wishing to seize what is God’s for himself.

Likewise, notice that no one adores the devil unless he falls, just as he himself fell; all the nations, tribes, and languages fell down and adored the golden statue (Dan 3:7). And this is why he says, if falling down you will adore me.

Third, notice that this is greed. Hence he promises a kingdom, in which is understood the abundance of riches, and superiority of honor. And he asks that he fall, because the ambitious always humble themselves further than is due. Hence Ambrose: ambition has a native danger; it is bent down to service, it may be given to honor, and when it wishes to be lofty, it becomes abject.

340. Next, the seizing of the enemy is set down; hence, then Jesus said to him. And concerning this he does two things:

first, he represses the temptation;

second, he brings in an authority, at for it is written.

341. It says then, Jesus said to him.

Notice that Christ had listened to many insults, but was not troubled. But this, if falling down you will adore me, he did not put up with, because the former things were insulting to himself, but this was insulting to God. Hence Chrysostom: one’s own injury should be tolerated; to ignore the insult of God is greatly impious. And therefore he says, begone, satan. With zeal have I been zealous for the Lord God of hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken your covenant (1 Kgs 19:10); for the zeal of your house has eaten me up (Ps 68:10).

Similarly, notice that it is not in the power of the devil to tempt as much as he wishes, but only so much as God permits; hence he says, begone, as though to say, I do not wish you to tempt any more. God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able: but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it (1 Cor 10:13); here you will come, and will go no further, and here you will break your swelling waves (Job 38:11).

342. And one should note that the Lord said similar words, as it were, to Peter (Matt 16:23). But there he said, go behind me. Hence the thought there and here is different; because satan is interpreted as ‘adversary’. Therefore the Lord willed that Peter, who wished to impede the passion, should go behind him; but here he says only, begone, because the devil cannot follow him. And therefore he says, begone, namely to hell; depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt 25:41).

343. It is written (Deut 6:16). He frequently brings in such texts from Deuteronomy, to indicate that the teaching of the New Testament is signified by Deuteronomy.

That which follows, ‘the Lord your God’, can be brought in two ways. First, as though to say, you devil, you say that falling down I should adore you, but the law says ‘you shall adore the Lord your God.’ Hence it can be brought in for this conclusion, that a mere man ought not be adored. Or, it should be taken such that he speaks of himself as though of God, ‘the Lord your God shall you adore’, as though to say, you ought rather to adore me, than the other way around, because it is written.

Yet the first is more literal.

344. And note that he says two things, namely ‘shall you adore’, and ‘shall you serve’, and there is a difference between these. For a man should relate himself to God in two ways, because he should be subject to him, and should raise himself to him as to the last end.

As regards the first, we owe him every obedience; we ought to obey God, rather than men (Acts 5:29). For we are subject to him when we do his every will.

Moreover, we are raised to God in two ways, because sometimes we draw ourselves toward him; come to him and be enlightened: and your faces will not be confounded (Ps 33:6); sometimes we draw others toward him; for we are God’s coadjutors (1 Cor 3:9). We point to either of these ways sensibly, because when we bow down, we remind ourselves that we should be subject to God; and so he says, the Lord your God; all nations will serve him (Ps 71:11). Likewise, by the fact that we offer sacrifices and praise, we indicate that we should raise our mind to him; and servitude pertains to this, and this is him only will you serve.

And there are two servitudes. There is a certain servitude which is due to God alone, and this is called ‘latria’ in Greek; and this is twofold. For a certain ‘latria’ is the adoration which is owed to God alone, which is that he be served above all; another servitude is that we should tend toward him as unto the last end, for there is an adoration or servitude which is only of subjects, as when inferiors serve superiors; let every soul be subject to higher powers (Rom 13:1). But one ought not to obey man above all, because one ought never to obey him contrary to God. Likewise, there is no creature which one ought to hold as a last end; put not your trust in princes: in the children of men, in whom there is no salvation (Ps 145:2–3). Cursed be the man that trusts in man (Jer 17:5). There is also a second servitude, which is owed to superiors, which is called ‘dulia’ in Greek.

345. Next, Christ’s victory is set down, and it is implied in two things. In the devil’s retreat, then the devil left him. Resist the devil, and he will fly from you (Jas 4:7).

And just as it was customary among the ancients that when someone had a victory, he was revered, so here Christ’s triumph is celebrated by the angels. Hence, and behold angels came and ministered to him. It does not say descended, because they were always with him, even if they had withdrawn for a time by his will, so that the devil might have a place for tempting. For they ministered to him in exterior things, namely in miracles, and other corporeal things which come about by the mediation of angels, for he needed nothing in interior things.

In this it is indicated that men who conquer the devil merit the service of angels; and it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:22).

And one should know that the devil left Christ only for a time, because afterwards he used the Jews as though his own members, to attack him.

Calling of the apostles

4:12 And when Jesus had heard that John was delivered up, he retired into Galilee: [n. 347]

4:13 and leaving the city Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum on the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim; [n. 354]

4:14 that it might be fulfilled what was said by Isaiah the Prophet: [n. 355]

4:15 land of Zabulon and land of Nephthalim, the way of the sea beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the gentiles: [n. 356]

4:16 the people who walked in darkness, have seen great light: and to them who sat in the region of the shadow of death, light has sprung up. [n. 357]

4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say: do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. [n. 360]

4:18 And Jesus walking by the Sea of Galilee, saw two brothers, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishermen. [n. 363]

4:19 And he said to them: come after me, and I will make you fishers of men. [n. 370]

4:20 And immediately leaving their nets, they followed him. [n. 371]

4:21 And going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets: and he called them. [n. 374]

4:22 And they immediately left their nets and father, and followed him. [n. 380]

346. Above, the Evangelist showed how Christ was examined and approved, namely by overcoming the devil; here he shows how Christ began to teach. And concerning this he does three things:

for first, the place in which he preached is described;

second, he shows how he chose the servants of his preaching, at and Jesus walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brothers;

third, how he brought the crowd to hear, at and Jesus went about all Galilee (Matt 4:23).

Concerning the first, he describes the time, the place, and the manner of preaching.

The second is at he retired into Galilee; the third, at from that time Jesus began to preach.

347. This time of Christ’s public preaching was after the imprisonment of John; hence he says, and when Jesus had heard that John was delivered up, namely by God, because he permitted it.

348. And one should note this for the understanding of the Gospels, that there is a seeming contrariety here between John and the other three evangelists, because the other three say that Christ came down into Capernaum after the imprisonment of John, but it is said that he came down into Capernaum before the imprisonment of John (John 2:12); which nevertheless was in Galilee.

One should respond that John, who was last, supplied those things which were left out by the others.

But why did they leave this out? One should say that, although Christ did some things in the first two years, yet they were few in comparison with those things which were done in the last year. So one should say that John speaks of those things which he did in the first and second years, and some things from the third; but these other Gospels speak of those things which were done in the last year.

349. Likewise, it is asked how many years Christ preached.

Some say that he preached for two and a half years, as from epiphany to Passover is reckoned as half a year, although it is not completed; for John does not make mention except of three Passovers, for after the baptism he says that he went into Jerusalem (John 2:13). Afterwards he mentions the Passover when he worked the miracle of the five loaves, and after that there was one year until the passion.

But this opinion does not seem true to this extent, that it does not accord with the opinion of the Church. For the Church holds that three miracles were worked on the day of epiphany, namely the adoration of the magi, the baptism, and the changing of water into wine. Therefore, it must be said that from the baptism to the conversion of water into wine was one year. Hence it seems that Christ preached for three years, because it was one year to the miracle of the wine; and from there to the Passover was another; from the purification to the passion was another; so thinks the Church.

And according to this, one should say that John says very little about the first year; he says something about the second, to be sure, namely how he came down into Capernaum, and about the question between Christ and the Jews about purification.

350. One should also know that John was killed around the time of the Passover; because it is said that the Passover was near when the miracle of the five loaves was worked (John 6:4); and it is said that Christ, having heard about the death of John, withdrew into Galilee (Matt 14:13). It is clear then that John had been beheaded around the Passover, and Christ had preached publicly for only one year.

351. Next he treats of the place, when he says, he retired into Galilee. And

first, the location of the province is treated;

second, of the city.

352. He says then, he retired; this withdrawal is not the first, which John speaks about (John 2:12); but this happened after one or two years, because the evangelists are silent about this.

Now, he withdrew for two reasons. First, so that he might put off the time of his passion; my time is not yet come (John 7:6). Second, for the sake of our example, namely that we might flee from persecutions; if they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you (John 15:20).

But mystically, he indicates that Christ’s preaching was going to pass over to the gentiles, because the Jews were persecuting the grace of God; to you it behoved us first to speak the word of God: but because you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the gentiles (Acts 13:46).

353. And coming into Galilee, he came first into Nazareth (Luke 4:18), and there he went into the synagogue, and taught, the Spirit of the Lord is upon me (Luke 4:18: Isa 61:1). And from there the Jews led him to the edge of a cliff, and wanted to throw him down; and afterwards Christ fled, and came into Capernaum, and there he immediately cured a demon-possessed man (Mark 1:23). But Matthew omits this.

354. Now, Nazareth is interpreted as ‘flower’. By this the teachers of the law are understood, who did not come to maturity. For Capernaum is interpreted as ‘most beautiful village’, and signifies the Church; you are beautiful, O my love (Song 6:3). Capernaum is literally by the sea, because it was next to a certain pleasant lake. For the Jews called every gathering of waters a sea; and mystically, because the Church is set next to the afflictions of the world.

In the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim. For Galilee was divided, and one part was in the tribe of Zabulon and Nephthali. For the princes of the Church were chosen from there, namely the apostles.

355. That it might be fulfilled what was said by Isaiah the prophet. Notice that this is not said exactly as it is in Isaiah, but the sense only is set down. Isaiah speaks thus: at the first time the land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephtali was lightened: and at the last the way of the sea beyond the Jordan of the Galilee of the gentiles was heavily loaded. The people that walked in darkness, have seen a great light (Isa 9:1–2).

And this is explained in three ways, according to Jerome. First, thus. The first time it was lightened from sins by Christ’s preaching, and at the last the way, which is next to the sea of Galilee, was heavily loaded with the burden of sin, because after Christ’s preaching they persecuted the apostles. Or in another way: at the first time. He touches upon the history, because the King of the Assyrians, Teglatphalassar, who first came over the land of the Jews, first led those tribes into captivity. And this is at the first time the land . . . was lightened because then the sinners were first led into captivity. And at the last, because afterward the whole people was led into captivity.

But how is this relevant? One should say that, where persecution first began, there the Lord willed first to give consolation.

Or in another way. At the first time, i.e., in the time of Christ’s preaching, the land . . . was lightened, i.e., they were freed from the burden of sins by Christ’s preaching, and at the last the way . . . was heavily loaded, i.e., the preaching of Christ was gathered together, and multiplied by Paul, who preached there.

356. For the Evangelist sets down only the sense in the arrangement: ‘land of Zabulon and land of Nephthalim, the way of the sea beyond the Jordan’, i.e., next to the sea. And he says, ‘land’, i.e., people, so that all might be named. And he says, ‘Galilee of the gentiles’, because Galilee is divided into two parts, one of the gentiles, the other of the Jews; and it had been divided at that time (1 Kgs 9:11), because Solomon, on account of the wood which the King of Tyre sent to him for the building of the temple, gave to him twenty cities. Since he was a gentile, he placed gentiles there to live; and therefore it is called ‘Galilee of the gentiles’, and was in the tribe of Nephtali; although the other was in the tribe of Judas.

Other texts: ‘beyond the Jordan of Galilee’, i.e., in comparison to Galilee. But the first explanation is better.

357. ‘The people who walked in darkness, have seen a great light.’ He says two things: ‘who walked’, and ‘who sat.’ For he who from the beginning is in a darkness which is not thick, and so he is not stupefied by it, goes forward, and most of all when he hopes to find light; and when he is stupefied by the darkness, he stands still.

This is the difference between the Jews and the gentiles, because although the Jews were in darkness, yet they were not entirely oppressed by it, because not all of them worshiped idols, but they hoped in the Christ to come, and therefore they walked; who is there among you . . . who has walked in darkness, and has no light? let him hope in the name of the Lord, and lean upon his God (Isa 50:10). But the gentiles were not expecting the Christ, and so there was no hope of light. And again, they were oppressed by the darkness, because they worshiped idols, since: in Judea God is known (Isa 50:10), and so they stood still. And this is what is said, ‘the people who sat in darkness, have seen a great light.’ The light of the Jews was not great, and we have the more firm prophetical word: to which you do well to attend, as to a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts (2 Pet 1:19). But unto you who fear my name, the Sun of justice will arise (Mal 4:2).

358. ‘And to them who sat’, i.e., the gentiles, ‘in the region of the shadow of death.’ ‘Death’ is damnation in hell; they are laid in hell like sheep: death will feed upon them (Ps 48:15). The ‘shadow of death’ is the likeness of future damnation which is in sinners. Now, the great punishment of those who are in hell is separation from God. And because sinners are already separated from God, they have a likeness of future damnation, as the just also have a likeness of future beatitude; but we all beholding the glory of the Lord with open face, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18).

359. And notice that ‘light has sprung up’ to the gentiles, because they had not come to the light, but the light came to them; the light is come into the world (John 3:19). ‘Light has sprung up.’ And this land is on the border of the Jews and the gentiles, to show that he called both; it is a small thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to convert the dregs of Israel. Behold, I have given you to be the light of the gentiles, that you may be my salvation even to the farthest part of the earth (Isa 49:6).

360. From that time Jesus began to preach. The place having been set down where Christ first began to preach, here the manner of preaching is set down. From that time, namely after defeating gluttony, vainglory, and ambition or greed, he began to preach; for such men can fittingly preach. And in this way is fulfilled, Jesus began to do and to teach (Acts 1:1).

Or, from that time, i.e., after the imprisonment of John, he began to preach publicly, for at first he preached in a hidden way and to certain men (John 1:38), namely to Peter, Andrew, Philip, and Nathaniel; but here, publicly. Now, at first he did not wish to preach publicly, so as to give place to John’s preaching; otherwise it would have done no good, just as the light of a star is obscured by the light of the sun. Moreover, by this it is signified that, the figures of the law having ceased, Christ’s preaching began; but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part will be done away (1 Cor 13:10). For John signifies the law; for all the prophets and the law prophesied until John (Matt 11:13).

Do penance. One should notice that Christ says here the same words as John, for two reasons. First, he reminds us of humility, namely so that no one would scornfully refuse to preach words said by another, since the very fount of ecclesiastical wisdom preached the same words as John. Second, because John is the voice, but he is the Word. Now, the same thing is signified by the word and the voice, because the word is expressive of the voice.

And concerning this he does two things: he urges one thing; he promises another.

The first is at do penance; the second is at for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

361. But why did he not give advice about justice at the beginning of his preaching, but to penance?

One should say that the reason was that he first gave advice about justice through the law of nature and the Scriptures, but they had transgressed; they have transgressed the laws, they have changed the ordinance, they have broken the everlasting covenant (Isa 24:5). For in this he gives one to understand that he found all men sinners; Christ Jesus came into this world to save sinners (1 Tim 1:15); for all have sinned, and do need the glory of God (Rom 3:23). And this is do penance.

362. He promises another thing; hence, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. This promise differs from the promise of the Old Testament in two ways, because there temporal things were promised, here heavenly and eternal things; if you are willing, and will hearken to me, you will eat the good things of the land (Isa 1:19). Similarly, there the kingdom of the Chanaanites and Jebusites was promised, here the kingdom of heaven; hence, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand in you. And so Christ’s teaching is called the New Testament, because a new agreement was made there between us and God concerning the kingdom of heaven; I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah (Jer 31:31).

Second, because the old law had a threat along with the promise; if you are willing, and will hearken to me, you will eat the good things of the land. But if you will not, and will provoke me to wrath: the sword will devour you (Isa 1:19). And Deuteronomy says the same thing, where many blessings are promised to those who serve the law, and Moses threatens many curses on the transgressors of the law (Deut 28). And this is because the old was a law of fear, but the new a law of love. Augustine: the difference briefly: fear and love. As: for you are not come to a mountain that might be touched, and a burning fire, and a whirlwind, and darkness, and storm, and the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words, which they that heard excused themselves, that the word might not be spoken to them (Heb 12:18–19). And so he says, the kingdom of heaven is at hand, namely eternal beatitude. And he says, is at hand, because the one who was giving descended to us, since we were not able to ascend to God.

363. And Jesus walking. After he began to preach, he wished to have servants of his preaching; so here he calls them to himself. And concerning this he does two things, according as he calls two pairs of servants: first he calls Peter and Andrew; second, James and John.

Concerning the first, he does four things:

first, the place of the calling is described;

second, the condition of those called is set down, at for they were fishermen;

third, the calling, at and he said to them;

fourth, their perfect obedience, at and they immediately leaving their nets, they followed him.

364. He says then, walking by the sea of Galilee. A fitting place, because, as the Gloss says, about to call fishermen, he walked by the sea.

Moreover, as regards the mystery, one should know that God’s standing signifies eternity and immobility; his walking, the temporal birth. Therefore, the fact that he called his disciples while walking signifies that he drew us to himself by the mystery of his incarnation; and arise, O Lord my God, in the precept which you have commanded, i.e., which you have arranged to be fulfilled, and a congregation of people will surround you (Ps 7:7–8).

And he says, of Galilee, by which is understood the turbulence of this world; but the wicked are like the raging sea, which cannot rest, and the waves thereof cast up dirt and mire (Isa 57:20). Christ has the likeness of a sinner; God sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh and of sin (Rom 8:3).

365. Next, the condition of the ones called is described.

And first, as regards number; second, as regards name; third, as regards acts; fourth, as regards office.

366. It says then that he saw two, not only with the eye of the body, but also with that of the mind; for his vision is a refuge of mercy; hence, I have seen the affliction of my people in Egypt (Exod 3:7).

And note that the same thing is signified by two and brothers, for both pertain to charity, which consists in the love of God and of neighbor. And this is why he chose pairs, and sent pairs for preaching; and he wished to signify spiritual charity by this, for charity is made more firm when it is founded on nature; behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell in unity (Ps 132:1).

367. Simon who is called Peter, that is, now, but not then, because Christ gave this name to him afterwards, but at first promised it; you will be called Cephas (John 1:42), but he gave it in Matthew: you are Peter (Matt 16:18). And Andrew.

Any preacher ought to have these names. For Simon is interpreted as ‘obedient’; Peter, as ‘discerning’; Andrew, as ‘courage’. And the preacher should be obedient, so he can invite others to this; an obedient man will speak of victory (Prov 21:28). Discerning, so that he may instruct others; I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also (1 Cor 14:19). Courageous, so that he may not be frightened by threats; for behold I have made you this day a fortified city, and a pillar of iron, and a wall of brass (Jer 1:18); behold I have made your face stronger than their faces: and your forehead harder than their foreheads. I have made your face like an adamant and like flint: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their presence (Ezek 3:8).

368. There follows, casting a net into the sea.

Chysostom asks why the Lord seized upon this hour. And he says, in order to give example that we ought never to omit the service of God on account of occupations. Or for this reason, because by this act was prefigured the future act of preaching, since men are drawn by the words of preaching as though by nets.

369. The office is set down, for they were fishermen. And one should know that among all men, fishermen are the most simple; and the Lord wished to have men from the most simple state in life, and chose these so that what was done through them would not be attributed to human wisdom; for see your vocation, brethren, that there are not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble: but the foolish things of the world has God chosen, that he may confound the wise (1 Cor 1:26–27). And therefore he did not choose an Augustine, or a Cyprian the orator, but Peter the fisherman; and from a fisherman he gained both a commander and an orator.

370. And he said to them. Here the calling is set down, concerning which three things are to be considered: first, he invites; second, he promises guidance; third, a reward.

He says then, come. This is only out of the divine generosity, that he draws them to himself; come over to me, all you who desire me, and be filled with my fruits (Sir 24:26); come to me, all you who labor, and are burdened, and I will refresh you (Matt 11:28). After me, as though to say, I am going, and you come after me, because I will be your leader; I will show you the way of wisdom, I will lead you by the paths of equity: which when you have entered, your steps will not be straitened, and when you run, you will not meet a stumblingblock (Prov 4:11–12); but to me your friends, O God, are made exceedingly honorable: their principality is exceedingly strengthened (Ps 138:17). I will make, as though, I will change your office into a greater one. It is said of these, behold I will send many fishers, says the Lord, and they will fish them (Jer 16:16).

And he says, I will make, because preaching labors exteriorly in vain, unless there is present the interior grace of the Redeemer; for they did not draw men by their own power, but by the working of Christ. And therefore he says, I will make. Indeed, this is the greatest dignity; hence Dionysius: there is nothing more dignified among human offices than to become a co-worker of God. For dignity consists only in his brightness. Moreover, those approach more to that dignity who are so illumined that they illumine others. Although indeed those who follow Christ illuminate men, and are made great with regard to justice, nevertheless they obtain the dignity of Christ regarding one thing only; the life of the preachers is made great regarding two things. They who are learned will shine as the brightness of the firmament: and they who instruct many to justice, as stars for all eternity (Dan 12:3).

371. Their obedience is set down at and immediately leaving their nets, they followed him. And he shows their obedience with regard to three things.

First, with regard to promptitude, because they did not put it off; hence, and immediately, contrary to those of whom it is said:defer it not from day to day (Sir 5:8); but when it pleased him, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the gentiles, immediately I condescended not to flesh and blood (Gal 1:15–16). The Lord has opened my ear, and I do not resist; I have not gone back (Isa 50:5)

372. Second, regarding readiness, because they left everything behind, since wealth is not to be considered, but disposition; because he leaves all things who leaves whatever he can have.

But what is the necessity for leaving all things? Chrysostom: no one can possess riches, and come perfectly to the kingdom of heaven; for they are an impediment to virtue, for they lessen the concern for eternal things, on account of which a man cannot perfectly inherit divine things. And therefore they should be left; and every one that strives for the mastery, refrains himself from all things (1 Cor 9:25).

373. Third, as regards execution, because they followed him: for it is not exceedingly great to leave all things, but perfection consists in following him, which is accomplished by charity. And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profits me nothing (1 Cor 13:3). For perfection does not consist per se in exterior things, that is, poverty, virginity, and suchlike, unless because these things are instruments for charity; and this is why it says, they followed him.

374. Next, he treats of the other calling: and going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother. And

first, the ones called are described;

second, the calling is set down, at and he called them;

third, the obedience of the ones called, at and they immediately left their nets and father, and followed him.

The ones called are described in four ways: as regards number, names, piety, and poverty.

375. It says then, and going on from there, he saw two other brothers. Note that from the beginning he called brothers; and although he called many others, nevertheless special mention is made of these, because they were first, and because he called them in pairs. For the new law is founded on charity; hence in the Old Testament he called two brothers, Aaron and Moses, because the command about charity was given even there. And because the new is more perfect, therefore in the beginning a twofold number of brothers is called.

376. James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother.

By these four is indicated the teaching of the four Gospels, or the four virtues; because by Peter, who is interpreted as ‘discerning’, the virtue of prudence is indicated; by Andrew, who is interpreted ‘manly’, or ‘most courageous’, the virtue of fortitude; by James, who is interpreted ‘supplanter’, the virtue of justice; by John, on account of virginity, the virtue of temperance.

377. Their piety is set down, since they were with Zebedee their father. Chrysostom: their piety is to be wondered at, because being poor, they sought bread by the art of fishing, and yet did not leave their old father. As: he who fears the Lord, honors his parents (Sir 3:8).

378. Their poverty is indicated by the fact that they were mending their nets. Nonetheless, by those who were casting the nets are signified those who carried on business in the world in the first age; by those who had already cast and were mending, are indicated those who had carried on business in the world for a long time; and they are already engrossed by sin, and are called to Christ. It is good for a man, when he has borne the yoke from his youth (Lam 3:27).

379. And he called them, interiorly and exteriorly; and whom he predestined, them he also called (Rom 8:30). To call interiorly is nothing other than to offer aid to the human mind when he wishes to convert us.

380. There follows, concerning obedience, and they immediately left their nets and father, and followed him. Note that the two above left only a boat, but these left nets, boat, and father; in which is signified that for the sake of Christ we should lay aside all earthly occupations, which are designated by the net: no man, being a soldier to God, entangles himself with secular businesses (2 Tim 2:4); riches, or possessions, which are indicated by the boat, if you will be perfect, go sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven, and come follow me (Matt 19:21); carnal passion, which is indicated by the father, forget your people and your father’s house (Ps 44:11).

But mystically, by Zebedee, who is interpreted ‘violent stream’, is signified the world.

381. But there is a question here: for it seems that these men sinned by leaving their father, old and poor, because children are bound to support their parents. And generally, it is asked whether it is permitted for someone to leave parents in their last need, by entering religion.

One should say that a counsel never acts against a precept; but this, namely, honor your father and your mother (Exod 20:12), is a precept; and therefore if the father can in no way live unless helped by the child, the child ought not to enter religion. But this was not the case with Zebedee, who was able to help himself, and had the necessary things.

382. Likewise, there is a literal question. For Matthew here seems contrary to John and Luke; for John says that they were called by the Jordan (John 1:28); here Matthew says by the Sea of Galilee. Similarly, Luke says that he called at the same time Peter and Andrew, James and John, even though he does not mention the other two, for it is believed that they were there (Luke 5:10). Similarly, there it says that all were called at once, here that they were called separately.

But one should know that there were three callings of the apostles. For first they were called to familiarity with Christ, (John 1), and this was in the first year of Christ’s preaching. Nor does what is said afterward present an obstacle, that his disciples went up with him into Cana of Galilee (cf. John 2:1–2), because according to Augustine they were not disciples at that time, but were going to be; just as if it said that Paul the Apostle was born in Tharsus of Ciliciae, when he was not an apostle at the time. Or one should say that it speaks of the other disciples, which names all those who believed in Christ. Second, they were called to discipleship (Luke 5). The third calling was so that they might cling entirely to Christ; and it speaks here about this; which is clear, according to Augustine, because Luke says, and having brought their boats to land (Luke 5:11). Therefore they had boats, and cared for them as though about to return to them; but it says here, and they immediately left everything. And therefore one should say that he speaks here of the last following.

Beginning of preaching

4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the Gospel of the kingdom: and healing all manner of sickness and every infirmity, among the people. [n. 384]

4:24 And his fame went throughout all Syria, and they presented to him all sick people who were taken with diverse diseases and torments, and such as were possessed by devils, and lunatics, and paralytics, and he cured them. [n. 389]

4:25 And many people followed him from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond the Jordan. [n. 394]

383. It is customary amongst kings that, the army being gathered together, they proceed to war; just so, Christ, with the army of apostles gathered together, proceeds to fighting against the devil by the office of preaching, to expel him from the world. Hence Christ’s teaching and preaching is treated of here. And set down is

first, Christ’s preaching;

second, the effect of the preaching, at and his fame went throughout all Syria.

Concerning the first, he touches upon three things.

First, the concern of the one teaching, and the manner of teaching, and the confirmation of the teaching set forth.

384. And the concern is shown in two things, because he was not seeking his own rest; hence, he went about; in carefulness, not slothful (Rom 12:11). Second, because he was not an acceptor of persons, whether of region or of village, but he went about all Galilee, without difference; let us go into the neighbouring towns and cities, that I may preach there also (Mark 1:38); in every place of his dominion (Ps 102:22).

385. The manner, at teaching in their synagogues. He says two things, teaching and preaching: teaching what should be done in the present, and foretelling the future; or teaching those things which pertain to the instruction of morals, I am the Lord your God who teaches you profitable things (Isa 48:17), foretelling the future, how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good tidings, and who preaches peace: of him who shows forth good, who preaches salvation (Isa 52:7). Or teaching natural justice, for certain things are brought forward in theology which natural reason dictates, namely justice and suchlike, and regarding this he says, teaching; but certain things are brought forth which exceed reason, such as the mystery of the Trinity and suchlike, and regarding this he says, preaching.

386. But there is an objection here about what the Gloss says, that he was teaching natural justice, such as chastity, and humility, and so on: for it does not seem that the natural virtues can be called virtues, since the virtues come through grace.

And one should say that the inclination, and the beginning, is natural; but the perfection, by which a man is rendered pleasing, is by grace, political things, and habituation.

387. In their synagogues. Note two things. First, that he sought the multitude, so that the preaching might accomplish more; I will give thanks to you in a great church (Ps 34:18). Likewise, that he preached only to the Jews; to you it behooved us first to speak the word of God (Acts 13:46). And preaching the Gospel of the kingdom: not fables and curious things, but those things which pertained to the kingdom of God, and those which would profit men.

388. Next, the preaching is confirmed by miracles; but they going forth preached everywhere: the Lord working withal, and confirming the word with signs that followed (Mark 16:20). Hence, healing. Sickness can be referred to bodily infirmity, and infirmities to infirmity of the soul; for the infirmities of the soul are not less than the infirmities of the body. Or, by sicknesses are meant heavy and long-lasting infirmities, while by infirmities are meant any other. Who heals all your diseases (Ps 102:3); the physician cuts off a short sickness (Sir 10:12). One is also given to understand in this that preachers should confirm their teaching with works; even if not with miracles, with a virtuous life; for I dare not to speak of any of those things which Christ works not by me, for the obedience of the gentiles, by word and deed, by the virtue of signs and wonders, in the power of the Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18–19).

389. And his fame went throughout all Syria. Here the effect of the preaching is set down. And it is threefold, namely regarding example, the confidence which men had in him, and the devotion with which men followed him.

390. It says then, and his fame went throughout all Syria. Syria is the region from Capernaum to the great sea; hence, he was made well known in the land of the gentiles, too. This also pertains to preachers, that they should have good testimony; take care of a good name (Sir 41:15); carefully study to present yourself approved unto God, a workman that does not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth (2 Tim 2:15).

Moreover, by Syria can be understood the pride of the world, because it is so interpreted; and the fame of Christ is spread through the whole world.

391. The confidence, at they presented to him all sick people who were taken with diverse diseases; for they knew that he could heal. Heal me, O Lord, and I will be healed: save me, and I will be saved (Jer 17:14). And it says first, his fame went throughout, and after that, they presented to him, because when someone has a reputation for holiness, men more readily expose their wounds to his knowledge. With diverse diseases and torments. By these heavy infirmities are indicated spiritual infirmities. By diseases can be understood long-lasting infirmities, and enduring infirmity is indicated; a long sickness is troublesome to the physician (Sir 10:11). And because some are burdened by infirmity, and others by the bitterness of sorrow, this is indicated when it says, and torments; and those who have a tormenting, burdened conscience are indicated. The sorrows of death surrounded me: and the torrents of iniquity troubled me (Ps 17:5). And such as were possessed by devils; and this is what is said in Luke, and they that were troubled with unclean spirits, were cured (Luke 6:18). By this is understood those who worshipped idols; for all the gods of the gentiles are devils (Ps 95:5); and I would not that you should be made partakers with devils (1 Cor 10:20).

392. Those are properly called lunatics who suffer a certain weakness of insanity in the waning of the moon; and then they are taken up by demons. And the devil afflicts them more at that time for two reasons. Jerome gives one, and it is that he might defame a creature of God; and this also happens in the effects of the magic art, by which demons are called under certain constellations, and demons come for this purpose, that they might exalt the creature, and lead men into idolatry.

The second reason is better: because the devil cannot do anything except through the powers of a body. Now, there is no doubt that lower bodies are changed according to the various changes of the higher bodies. And therefore the devil, called at that time, comes gladly when he sees the higher bodies working toward that effect for which he is called. Moreover, in the waning of the moon, as is clear, fluids are diminished; and so the waning of the moon works toward such infirmity, when the earth is not full of fluids. And this is why the devil vexes more at that time; and this is and lunatics.

393. By them we can understand the inconstant, a holy man continues in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon (Sir 27:12), who have the intention of living chastely, but are overcome by passions, for I do not that good which I will; but the evil which I hate, that I do (Rom 7:15). And paralytics. Those are properly called paralytics who have their members loosened such that they are not able to gain control of their members. By these are signified the ignorant; and all these are cured by Christ, hence, and he cured them, that is, perfectly.

394. Next, the third effect is set down, namely the devotion of those who followed; hence, and many people followed him. And arise, O Lord my God, in the precept which you have commanded: and a congregation of people will surround you (Ps 7:7–8).

But one should know that men were following in different ways. For some, that is, the apostles, followed with a zeal for salvation, namely spiritual salvation; hence above: leaving their nets, they followed him (Matt 4:20); and, behold we have left all things, and have followed you (Matt 19:27). Some followed with a zeal for bodily salvation; and a very great multitude of people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast both of Tyre and Sidon, who had come to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases (Luke 6:17–18). Some followed only out of curiosity, to see miracles; and a great multitude followed him, because they saw the miracles which he did on them that were diseased (John 6:2). Others followed to lie in ambush, such as the Pharisees and scribes; for I heard the reproaches of many, and terror on every side (Jer 20:10).

395. From Galilee. This is the province where Christ first began to preach, and it is interpreted as ‘transmigration’. This signifies those who should transmigrate from vices to virtues. And from Decapolis. This is a region where there are ten villages; and it signifies those who are zealous in observing the ten commandments. And from Jerusalem. Jerusalem is interpreted as ‘vision of peace’; and it signifies those who come to Christ in the desire for peace; much peace have those who love your law (Ps 118:165). And from Judea. Judea is interpreted as ‘confession’, and signifies those who come to Christ through the remission of sins; made his sanctuary, Israel his dominion (Ps 113:2). And from beyond the Jordan. And this signifies those who come to Christ through baptism, for baptism was prefigured in the Jordan.

The Sermon on the Mount

Christ ascends the mountain

5:1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up onto a mountain, and when he had sat down, his disciples came to him. [n. 396]

5:2 And opening his mouth, he taught them, saying: [n. 401]

396. And seeing the multitudes. Here the Lord sets forth his own teaching; and it is divided into three parts.

In the first, Christ’s teaching is set forth;

in the second, the power of the teaching;

in the third, the end to which it leads.

The second is in chapter thirteen; the third, in chapter seventeen.

The first is divided into three parts.

In the second, the ministers of the teaching are instructed;

in the third, adversaries are confounded.

The second is in chapter ten; the third, in chapter eleven.

The first is divided into two parts.

In the first, Christ’s teaching is set forth;

in the second, it is confirmed by miracles, in chapter eight.

The first, into two parts.

In the first, a certain title is prefaced, as it were, to the teaching;

in the second, the teaching itself is explained, at blessed are the poor in spirit (Matt 5:3).

Concerning the first, he does three things.

First, he describes the place where the teaching was set forth;

second, those who heard the teaching;

third, he sets out the manner of teaching.

The second is at and when he had sat down; the third, at and opening his mouth, he taught them.

397. He says therefore, as I said, that they followed him. And seeing the multitudes, he went up onto a mountain. This text can be understood in two ways. First, as follows. He went up with the aim of teaching the crowds, that is, not fleeing. Hence Chrysostom says that just as a craftsman, when he sees material prepared, delights in working, so the priest delights in preaching when he sees the people gathered together. And so, he went up; I will give thanks to you in a great assembly (Ps 34:18).

Or in another way. He went up, that is, fleeing from the crowds, so that he might teach the disciples more safely; the words of the wise are heard in silence (Eccl 9:17).

398. And one should note that Christ had three places of refuge: for sometimes he fled to a mountain, as is said here and at Jesus went to the Mount of Olives (John 8:1). Sometimes, to a boat; when the multitudes pressed upon him to hear the word of God . . . going into one of the ships that was Simon’s . . . he taught, seated (Luke 5:1–3). Third, into the desert; come apart into a desert place, and rest a little (Mark 6:31).

And fittingly enough, for a man can take refuge in God in three ways: in the protection of the divine loftiness, which is signified by the mountain; they that trust in the Lord will be as Mount Zion (Ps 125:1). In the ecclesiastical society, which is indicated by the boat; Jerusalem, which is built as a city, which is compact together (Ps 122:3). In the solitude of religious life, which is understood by the desert, through the contempt of temporal things; behold I will allure her, and will lead her into the wilderness: and I will speak to her heart (Hos 2:14); lo, I have gone far off flying away; and I abode in the wilderness (Ps 55:6–7).

399. Moreover, he went up onto the mountain for five reasons. First, to show his excellence: for he himself is the mountain of whom it is said, the mountain of God is a fat mountain (Ps 68:15). Second, to show that the teacher of this teaching ought to climb up in the loftiness of his life; get you up upon a high mountain, you who bring good tidings to Zion (Isa 40:9). Chrysostom: no one can linger in a valley who speaks of heaven. The third reason, to show the loftiness of the Church to whom the teaching is set forth; and in the last days the mountain of the house of the Lord will be prepared on the top of mountains, and it will be exalted above the hills (Isa 2:2). Fourth, to show the perfection of this teaching, because it is most perfect; your justice is as the mountains of God (Ps 36:6). Fifth, that it might correspond to the old law, which had been given on a mountain (Exod 19, 24).

400. Next, the hearers are set down, and when he had sat down, his disciples came to him. One can note two things in his sitting. A humbling; you have known my sitting down, and my rising up (Ps 139:2). When he was in the loftiness of divine majesty, his teaching could not be grasped; but when he humbled himself, then men began to understand. Or, this pertains to the dignity of the teacher; the scribes and the Pharisees have sat on the chair of Moses (Matt 23:2). For rest is necessary for one who is zealous for wisdom. His disciples came to him, not only in body, but in soul; come to him and be enlightened (Ps 34:5); they that approach to his feet, will receive of his doctrine (Deut 33:3).

And notice that when the Lord preached to the crowds, he stood; and coming down with them, he stood in a plain place (Luke 6:17); but here, when he taught the disciples, he sat. Out of this grew the custom that one preaches to the crowds standing, and to religious sitting.

401. And opening his mouth, he taught them. Here the manner of teaching is set down.

The fact that it says opening signifies that he had been silent for a long time before. And it shows that the sermon was going to be great and long, as Augustine says. Or that he was about to say great and profound things; for men often do this; after this Job opened his mouth, and cursed his day (Job 3:1).

And it says, his, for earlier he had opened the mouths of the prophets; for wisdom opened the mouth of the dumb, and made the tongues of infants eloquent (Wis 10:21): for he himself is the Wisdom of the Father.

402. But there is a question here, for this sermon is set down in Luke, for the most part (Luke 6:20–49). But there seems to be a contradiction between this account and that one, as is evident in the text.

And Augustine sets down two solutions. One is that this is a different sermon from that one; for he first went up onto a mountain, and gave this sermon to the disciples, and afterwards, coming down, found the crowd gathered together, to whom he preached the same things and recapitulated many things; and Luke speaks about this. Or otherwise one should say that there was one mountain, and it had a level area on the side; another little mountain raised up that level area. Hence the Lord went up onto a mountain, i.e., onto the level area of this mountain. And first he went up higher, and called together the disciples, and there chose the twelve apostles, as is clear in Luke; and afterwards, coming down, he found the crowd gathered together, and, when the disciples came, he sat, and gave this sermon to the crowd and to the disciples. And this seems more true, because Matthew says at the end of the sermon that the multitudes hearing it, were in admiration at his doctrine (Matt 22:33). Yet however it is taken, there is no contradiction.

The Beatitudes

5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. [n. 415]

5:4 Blessed are the meek: for they will possess the land. [n. 419]

5:5 Blessed are they who mourn: for they will be comforted. [n. 422]

5:6 Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after justice: for they will have their fill. [n. 427]

5:7 Blessed are the merciful: for they will obtain mercy. [n. 430]

5:8 Blessed are the clean of heart: for they will see God. [n. 434]

5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they will be called children of God. [n. 436]

5:10 Blessed are they who suffer persecution for justice’s sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. [n. 443]

403. Above, the Evangelist set down a brief title, as it were, of the teaching of Christ;¹ now he sets down the teaching itself, and its effect, namely, the wonder of the crowds.

Now it should be considered that, according to Augustine, the whole perfection of our life is contained in this sermon of the Lord.¹ And he proves it by the fact that the Lord includes the end to which he leads us, that is, a promise. But that which man desires most of all is beatitude. Hence the Lord does three things.

First, he promises a reward, which those who accept this teaching will obtain;

second, he sets down the precepts, at do not think that I have come to destroy the law (Matt 5:17);

third, he teaches how someone can succeed in observing them, at ask, and it will be given to you (Matt 7:7).

Concerning the first, he does two things, because some are only observers of this teaching, others ministers.

First, therefore, he describes the beatitude of the one who observes the precepts;

second, the beatitude of the ministers, at blessed are you when they will revile you (Matt 5:11).

404. Now, one should note that many things are set down here about the beatitudes; but never could anyone speak so skillfully about the Lord’s words that he could attain to the Lord’s purpose. Yet one should know that all complete happiness is included in these words: for all men desire happiness, but they differ in their judgments about happiness, and for this reason some men desire this, others desire that.

But we find four opinions about happiness. For some believe that it consists only in exterior things: namely, in an abundance of temporal things; they have called the people happy, that have these things (Ps 144:15). Others, that perfect beatitude consists in the fact that a man fulfills his own will; hence we say, blessed is he who lives as he wants. And I have known that there was no better thing than to rejoice, and to do well in this life (Eccl 3:12). Others say that perfect beatitude consists in the virtues of the active life. Others, that it consists in the virtues of the contemplative life, namely of divine and intelligible things, as Aristotle says.¹

But all these opinions are false, although not in the same way. Hence the Lord condemns all these.

405. He condemns the opinion of those who say that it consists in the abundance of exterior things: hence, he says, blessed are the poor, as though to say, the wealthy are not happy.

406. And he condemns the opinion of those who place beatitude in the satisfaction of appetite when he says, blessed are the merciful.

But one should know that there are three appetites in man. The irascible, which desires vengeance on enemies, and he condemns this when he says, blessed are the meek. The concupiscible, whose good is to rejoice and be delighted; he condemns this when he says, blessed are they who mourn. The will, which is twofold, according as it seeks two things: first, that the will be forced by no higher law; second, that it be able to bind others as subjects: hence it desires to command, and not to be under another. But the Lord shows the contrary regarding both. And regarding the first, he says, blessed are they who hunger and thirst after justice. Regarding the second, he says, blessed are the merciful. Therefore both those who place beatitude in the abundance of exterior things and those who place it in the satisfaction of appetite are wrong.

407. Those, however, who place beatitude in the actions of the active life, namely, in moral acts, are wrong, but less so, because that is the way to beatitude. Hence the Lord does not condemn them as though evil, but shows the ordering to beatitude. Because the virtues of the active life are either ordered to oneself, such as temperance and others of this kind, and their end is cleanness of heart, because they enable one to conquer the passions; or they are ordered to another, and so their end is peace, and of this kind: the work of justice will be peace (Isa 32:17). And therefore these virtues are ways to beatitude, and not beatitude itself; and this is blessed are the clean of heart: for they will see God. He does not say, they see, because this would be beatitude itself. And similarly, blessed are the peacemakers, not because they make peace, but because they tend toward something else: for they will be called children of God.

408. Now, the opinion of those who say that beatitude consists in the contemplation of divine things is condemned by the Lord only as to the timing, for otherwise it is true; because the last happiness does consist in the vision of the best intelligible, namely God; hence he says, they will see.

And one should note that, according to the Philosopher, two things are required for the contemplative act to make one happy: one has to do with the substance, namely, that it be the act of the highest intelligible, which is God; the other has to do with form, namely love and delight, for delight perfects happiness just as beauty perfects youth.¹ And therefore the Lord sets down two things, they will see God and they will be called children of God, for this pertains to the union of love. Behold what manner of charity the Father has bestowed upon us, that we should be called, and should be the sons of God (1 John 3:1).

409. Likewise, one should note that in these beatitudes, certain things are set down as merits, and certain things as rewards: and this is clear in each case. Blessed are the poor in spirit: here is a merit; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven: here is the reward; and so on in the others.

410. And one should note also something about merit in general, and something about reward in general. About merit, one should know that the Philosopher distinguishes two kinds of virtue: one common, which perfects a man in a human manner; the other special, which he calls heroic, which perfects above the human manner.¹ For when a brave man fears where there is something to be feared, that is a virtue; but if he did not fear, it would be a vice. But if he feared nothing, trusting in the help of God, that would be a virtue above the human manner; and these virtues are called divine. Therefore, these acts are perfect, and virtue also is a perfect operation, according to the Philosopher.² So these merits are either acts of the gifts, or acts of the virtues according as they are perfected by the gifts.

411. Likewise, note that the acts of the virtues are those about which the law commands; moreover, the merits of the beatitudes are acts of the virtues; and therefore all those things which are commanded and are contained below are referred back to these beatitudes. Hence just as Moses first set down the commandments, and afterwards said many things which were all referred back to the commandments given, so Christ in his teaching first sets forth these beatitudes, to which all the others are reduced.

412. Concerning the first, one should note that God is the reward of those who serve him; the Lord is my portion, said my soul: therefore will I wait for him (Lam 3:24); the Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my cup (Ps 16:5); I am the Lord who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldees, to give you this land, and that you might possess it (Gen 15:7). And as Augustine says in Book II of the Confessions: when a soul turns away from you, it seeks goods outside of you. Now, men seek diverse things; but anything that can be found in any life, the Lord promises in its entirety in God. For some place the highest good in the abundance of riches, through which they can attain the greatest dignity; the Lord promises a kingdom which embraces both, but he says that one must arrive at this kingdom by the way of poverty, not of riches. Hence, blessed are the poor. Others arrive at this honor through war; but the Lord says, blessed are the meek. Others seek consolations through pleasure; the Lord says, blessed are they who mourn. Some are unwilling to be subject to another; but the Lord says, blessed are they who hunger and thirst after justice. Some wish to avoid evil by oppressing those subject to them; the Lord says, blessed are the merciful. Some place the vision of God in the contemplation of truth in this life; but the Lord promises this vision in the homeland; hence, blessed are the clean of heart.

413. And one should notice that these rewards, which the Lord touches upon here, can be had in two ways, namely perfectly and completely, and they are had in this way only in the homeland; or as a beginning and imperfectly, and they are had in this way in this life. Hence the saints have a certain beginning of that beatitude. And because these things cannot be explained in this life as they will be in the homeland, therefore Augustine explains them according as they are in this life; therefore, blessed are the poor in spirit: not in hope only, but also in actuality.¹ For lo, the kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21).

Hence, these things having been prefaced, let us proceed to the text.

414. The Evangelist does two things in these beatitudes.

First, the beatitudes themselves are set down;

second, a manifestation of the beatitudes, at blessed are they who suffer persecution for justice’s sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven; for this expresses all the beatitudes.

Now, virtue does three things: for it removes one from evil, works and makes one to work what is good, and disposes one to what is best.

First, then, he determines about the first, at blessed are the poor; about the second, at blessed are they who hunger; about the third, at blessed are the clean of heart.

Moreover, virtue removes one from three evils: greed, cruelty or disturbance, and harmful pleasure.

The first is noted at blessed are the poor; the second, at blessed are the meek; the third, at blessed are they who mourn.

415. He says then, blessed are the poor. It is read in two ways.

First, in this way: blessed are the poor, i.e., the humble, who reckon themselves to be poor; for they are the truly humble who reckon themselves poor, not only in external things, but even in interior things; I am a beggar and poor (Ps 40:17); on the other hand: I am rich, and made wealthy, and have need of nothing: and know not, that you are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked (Rev 3:17).

And then what is said, in spirit, can be read in three ways. For the pride of a man is sometimes called the spirit; cease therefore from the man, whose breath is in his nostrils, for he is reputed high (Isa 2:22); the spirit of the mighty is like a whirlwind beating against a wall (Isa 25:4). And pride is called spirit because as breath inflates a bag, so pride inflates men: puffed up by the sense of his flesh (Col 2:18). Therefore, blessed are the poor, namely those who have little of the spirit of pride. Or spirit is taken as the will of man. For some are humble by necessity, and these are not blessed, but rather those who put on humility. Third, it is taken as the Holy Spirit; hence, blessed are the poor in the Spirit, who are humble through the Holy Spirit. And these two come to the same thing, so to speak. And he says, the poor in spirit, because humility gives one the Holy Spirit; but for whom will I have respect, except him that is poor and little, and of a contrite spirit, and that trembles at my words? (Isa 66:2).

To these poor ones is promised the kingdom, in which is understood the highest excellence. And although this is bestowed upon any virtue, yet it is especially given to humility; because he who humbles himself, will be exalted (Luke 14:11). And, glory will uphold the humble of spirit (Prov 29:23).

416. Or in another way, according to Jerome. Poor in spirit, literally, in renunciation of temporal things.¹ And he says, in spirit, because some are poor by necessity, but beatitude is not due them, but rather to those who are poor by will. And those who are poor by will are so called in two ways, because although some have riches, yet they do not have them in their heart; if riches abound, set not your heart upon them (Ps 62:11). Others neither have, nor desire, and this is more secure, because the mind is drawn from spiritual things by riches. And these are properly called poor in spirit, because the acts of the gifts, which are above the human manner, are those of the blessed man: and that a man should reject all riches, so that he does not even desire them in some way, this is above the human manner.

417. To these is promised the kingdom of heaven, in which is indicated not only loftiness of honor, but the abundance of riches; has not God chosen the poor in this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which God has promised to those who love him? (Jas 2:5).

And note that Moses first promised riches; the Lord your God will make you higher than all the nations that are on the earth (Deut 28:1); and further down, blessed will you be in the city, and blessed in the field. And therefore, that the Lord might distinguish the old law from the new, he first places beatitude in the contempt of temporal riches.

418. Likewise note, following Augustine, that this beatitude pertains to the gift of fear.¹ Because fear, most of all filial fear, makes one have reverence toward God; and out of this a man despises riches. Isaiah sets out the beatitudes in descending order: and there will come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower will rise up out of his root. And the spirit of the Lord will rest upon him: the spirit of wisdom, and of understanding, the spirit of counsel, and of fortitude, the spirit of knowledge, and of piety. And the spirit of the fear of the Lord will fill him (Isa 11:1–3). Christ sets them out the other way around, from the gift of fear, namely from poverty, because Isaiah foretold the coming of Christ to earth, but Christ drew men up from the earth.

419. Blessed are the meek. This is the second beatitude; but lest someone say that poverty is enough for beatitude, he shows that it is not enough: rather gentleness is required, which restrains one with regard to anger, just as temperance restrains one with regard to concupiscence; for he is meek who does not grow angry. Now this could come about by virtue, namely that you are not angered except by a just cause; but if you are not provoked even when you have a just cause, this is above the human manner; and therefore he says, blessed are the meek. For fighting is on account of an abundance of external things; and therefore there would be no disturbance if a man did not desire riches. And therefore those who are not meek are not poor in spirit. And this is why he immediately adds, blessed are the meek.

And note that this consists in two things. First, that a man is not angered; second, that if he is angered, he restrains his anger. Ambrose speaks this way: it belongs to the prudent man to moderate the motion of anger, nor is it called a lesser virtue to be angry with restraint, than not to be angered at all. I judge the latter much easier, the former much harder.¹

420. Chrysostom says: among many eternal promises, he places one earthly promise.¹ Hence, literally, the meek possess that land. For many go to court to acquire possessions, but frequently they lose their life and all their things; but frequently the gentle have it all: the meek will inherit the land (Ps 37:11).

But it is better explained as referred to the future. And then it can be explained in many ways. Hilary speaks this way: they will possess the land, i.e., the glorified body of Christ, because they will be conformed to that brilliance in their own body;¹ his eyes will see the king in his beauty, they will see the land far off (Isa 33:17); who will reform the body of our lowness, made like to the body of his glory (Phil 3:21).

Or in another way. This land is the land of the dead for a while, because it is subjected to corruption, but it will be freed from corruption, according to the Apostle (Rom 8:21). Therefore this land, when it is glorified and freed from the servitude of corruption, will be called the land of the living. Or, by the land is understood the fiery heaven, where the blessed are;¹ and it is called the land, because just as the land is related to heaven, so is that heaven related to the heaven of the Holy Trinity. Or, they will possess the land, i.e., their own glorified body.

Augustine explains this metaphorically, and he says that by this one should understand a certain solidity of the saints in the knowledge of the first truth;¹ I believe I shall see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living (Ps 27:13).

421. This second beatitude is related to the gift of piety, because those get angry, properly speaking, who are not contented with the divine ordering of things.

422. Blessed are they who mourn. Two beatitudes were mentioned by which we are drawn away from the evils of desire and of cruelty; here a third is set down, by which we are drawn away from the evil of harmful pleasure or enjoyment. And this is blessed are they who mourn.

In the Old Testament, he promised earthly things, and earthly enjoyment; and they will flow together to the good things of the Lord, for the corn, and wine, and oil (Jer 31:12). Then after that, then will the virgin rejoice in the dance, the young men and old men together. But the Lord on the contrary places beatitude in mourning.

But one should notice that not just any lamenting can be called mourning, but that by which someone laments a dead one dear to him; for the Lord speaks here by way of excess. Just as above, blessed are the poor, so here he mentions the greatest grief; for just as those who grieve the dead receive no consolation, so the Lord wishes our life to be in mourning; make mourning as for an only son, a bitter lamentation (Jer 6:26).

And this mourning can be explained in three ways. First, for sins, not only personal, but another’s as well, for if we mourn those who are dead in body, much more those who are dead spiritually; how long will you mourn for Saul? (1 Sam 16:1); who will give water to my head, and a fountain of tears to my eyes? And I will weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people (Jer 9:1). Now this beatitude is set down fittingly enough after the previous one. For someone could say, ‘it is enough not to do evil,’ and this is true in the beginning, before sin; but after a sin is committed, it is not enough unless you make satisfaction. Second, it can be taken as mourning for our dwelling in present misery; woe is me, that my sojourning is prolonged! (Ps 120:5). This is the watering above and below, about which, weep over your sins, and over the sojourning of the heavenly homeland (Jos 15:19).¹ Third, according to Augustine, for the mourning which men make over the joys of the world, which they abandon by coming to Christ; for some men die to the world, and the world dies to them;² but God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ; by whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world (Gal 6:14). Now as we mourn over the dead, so these men mourn, because it cannot be but that they feel some sorrow in abandoning everything.

423. Moreover, to these three mournings correspond three consolations, because to the mourning for sins corresponds remission of sins, which David begged for, saying, restore unto me the joy of your salvation (Ps 51:12). To the delay of the heavenly homeland and the dwelling in present misery corresponds the consolation of eternal life, about which it is said, I will turn their mourning into joy, and will comfort them, and make them joyful after their sorrow (Jer 31:13); and, you will be comforted in Jerusalem (Isa 66:13). To the third mourning corresponds the consolation of divine love; for when someone sorrows over the loss of a thing loved, he takes consolation if he acquires another thing more loved. Hence men are consoled when instead of temporal things they receive spiritual and eternal things, which is to receive the Holy Spirit; which is why he is called the Comforter (John 15:26). For men rejoice through the Holy Spirit, who is the divine love; your sorrow will be turned into joy (John 16:20).

424. And one should note that this beatitude is appropriated to the gift of knowledge, because they mourn who know the misery of others; hence it says about certain men who do not have such knowledge, they lived in a great war of ignorance, they call so many and so great evils peace (Wis 14:22); on the other hand, he that adds knowledge, adds also labor (Eccl 1:18).

425. And one should notice that this reward is so ordained that the second is always added onto the first. For first he said, blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven; afterward, for they will possess the land: for it is more to possess than merely to have. Likewise, afterward, for they will be comforted: for it is more to be consoled than to possess, for some possess things but do not take delight in them.

426. Next, those beatitudes being set down which pertain to the removal of evil, here the beatitude which pertains to the working of good is set down. And our good is twofold, namely the good of justice and the good of mercy. And so he sets out two things.

427. As regards the first, he says, blessed are they who hunger and thirst after justice. Justice is taken in three ways, according to Chrysostom and the Philosopher.¹ For sometimes it is taken as every virtue: and every virtue is called legal justice, which commands concerning the acts of the virtues. Hence insofar as a man obeys the law, he fulfills the work of all the virtues. It is taken in another way as a particular virtue, one of the four cardinal virtues, to which is opposed greed, or injustice, and it concerns buying, selling, and renting.

So what he says here, who hunger after justice, can be understood generally, or particularly.

If it is understood as about the general meaning of justice, he says this for two reasons. The first is Jerome’s, who says that it is not enough that a man should work the work of justice, unless he works with desire;¹ I will freely sacrifice to you (Ps 54:6). And in another place, my soul has thirsted after the strong living God; when will I come and appear before the face of God? (Ps 42:2). I will send forth a famine into the land: not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water, but of hearing the word of the Lord (Amos 8:11). Therefore it is a hunger when someone works with desire.

Another reason. Justice is twofold, perfect and imperfect. We cannot have perfect justice in this world, because if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (1 John 1:8). And, all our justices are as the rag of a menstruous woman (Isa 64:6). But we have this in heaven; your people will be all just, they will inherit the land for ever (Isa 60:21). But we can have a desire for justice here: and therefore, he says, blessed are they who hunger and thirst after justice. And what Pythagoras did is similar.¹ For in the time of Pythagoras, those who studied were called ‘sophi’, i.e., wise men; but Pythagoras did not wish to be called ‘sophos’, i.e., wise, but ‘philosopher’, that is, a lover of wisdom; in this way the Lord wills that his own be and be called lovers of justice.

But if it is understood as about particular justice, which is that a man render to each what is his own, then it is fittingly said, blessed are they who hunger, because hunger and thirst properly belong to the greedy, since those who desire to possess another’s goods unjustly are never satisfied. Hence the hunger about which the Lord speaks is opposed to this one, namely the hunger of the greedy. And the Lord wills that we pant after that justice in this way, because we will never be, as it were, satisfied in this life, just as the greedy man is never satisfied. Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after justice: for they will have their fill.

428. A fitting reward is set forth, they will have their fill, and it is first in the eternal vision, for they will see God through his essence; I will be satisfied when your glory will appear (Ps 17:15). For there nothing remains to be desired; who satisfies your desire with good things (Ps 103:5); to the just their desire will be given (Prov 10:24).

Second, in the present. And this satisfaction is twofold. One is in spiritual goods, that is in the fulfillment of God’s commands; my meat is to do the will of him that sent me, that I may perfect his work (John 4:34); and Augustine explains this. In another way, it is taken as concerning a plenitude of temporal things. Unjust men are never filled, but men who have as their end justice itself, do not go beyond it; the just eats and fills his soul: but the belly of the wicked is never to be filled (Prov 13:25).

429. According to Augustine, this beatitude is reduced to the gift of fortitude, because it pertains to fortitude that a man works justly.¹ Likewise, he adds something to the reward set out above, because to be filled is to fulfill the desires entirely.

Likewise, note that first he says, blessed are they who mourn, for when a man is ill, he does not desire to eat, but he begins to desire when he has just begun to be healed; and so it is in the spiritual life, for when men are in sin, they do not feel spiritual hunger, but when they abandon sin, then they feel it. And therefore he immediately adds, blessed are the merciful, because justice without mercy is cruelty, while mercy without justice is the mother of laxity. And so it is necessary that both be joined together: let not mercy and truth leave you (Prov 3:3). Mercy and truth have met each other: justice and peace have kissed (Ps 85:10).

430. Blessed are the merciful: for they will obtain mercy. To be merciful is to have a miserable heart at the misery of others. Moreover, we have pity on the miseries of others when we think of them as our own. Now, we sorrow for our miseries, and we are eager to drive them away; therefore you are truly merciful when you are eager to drive away the misery of others.

And the misery of one’s neighbor is twofold. First, in temporal things, and for this we should have a miserable heart; he who has the substance of this world, and will see his brother in need, and will shut up his innermost from him: how does the charity of God abide in him? (1 John 3:17). Second, when a man is made miserable through sin; because, just as there is beatitude in the works of the virtues, so there is a particular misery in vices. Sin makes nations miserable (Prov 14:34). And therefore, when we warn those falling so that they may return, we are merciful; and seeing the multitudes, he had compassion on them (Matt 9:36). Therefore, these merciful ones are blessed.

431. And why? For they will obtain mercy. And one should know that the gifts of God always exceed our merit; for the Lord makes recompense, and will give you seven times as much (Sir 35:13). Therefore the mercy which our Lord has on us is much greater than that which we have on our neighbor.

This mercy is begun in this life in two ways. First, because sins are loosed: who forgives all your iniquities (Ps 103:3). Second, because he removes temporal defects, such that he makes his sun to rise (Matt 5:45); yet it will be perfected in the future, when every misery, both of guilt and of punishment, will be taken away. O Lord, your mercy is in heaven (Ps 36:6). And this is for they will obtain mercy.

432. This beatitude is reduced to the gift of counsel; because this is a unique counsel, that we should obtain mercy amidst the dangers of this world. Godliness is profitable to all things (1 Tim 4:8); wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you (Dan 4:24).

433. So in this way are set down the acts of the virtues by which we are withdrawn from what is evil and do what is good. Now are set down the acts by which we are disposed to what is best; hence, blessed are the clean of heart. This beatitude consists in two things: in the vision of God and in the love of neighbor. Hence,

first, he sets out the beatitude which pertains to the vision of God;

second, the beatitude which pertains to the love of neighbor, at blessed are the peacemakers.

434. He says then, blessed are the clean of heart: for they will see God.

Here there is first a question of literal meaning. For we know that God cannot be seen: No man has ever seen God (1 John 4:12). And lest someone say that although no one sees at present, he will see in the future, the Apostle takes this possibility away: Who only has immortality, and inhabits light inaccessible, whom no man has seen, nor can see (1 Tim 6:16).

But one should know that there are different opinions about this. For some have held that God is never seen in his essence, but in some reflection of his glory; but the Gloss condemns this, commenting on, man will not see me and live (Exod 33:20), with two arguments. First, because this opposes the authority of Sacred Scripture, we will see him as he is (1 John 3:2). Similarly, we see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to face (1 Cor 13:12). It is likewise opposed to reason, because the beatitude of man is the last good of man, in which his desire is set to rest. Now, it is a natural desire that a man, seeing an effect, inquires about the cause; hence also the philosophers’ wonder was the origin of philosophy, because when they saw effects, they wondered and sought the cause. Therefore, that desire will not be set to rest until it arrives at the first cause, which is God, namely at the divine essence itself. Therefore, he will be seen through his essence.

Others have erred even more, holding the contrary position, for they said that we will see the essence of God not only with the eye of the mind, but with the eye of the body as well, and that Christ sees the divine essence with his bodily eye. But this does not hold together; which is clear, first from the Scriptural text which is mentioned here, because he would not say, blessed are the clean of heart, but, ‘blessed are they who have clean and pure eyes.’ So he gives one to understand that he will not see except with the heart, i.e., the intellect, for heart is taken this way: the eyes of your heart enlightened (Eph 1:18). Second, because the sense of a body can only attain to its own object; but if it be said that then it will have a greater power, one should say that then it would not be bodily vision, because the bodily eye sees only colors, and sees the essence per accidens, according to Augustine, in the last book of The City of God (22.29). Just as when I see something living, we can say that I see life, insofar as I see certain indications by which its life is pointed out to me, so it will be in the divine vision, because the reflection of God in the new heaven and the new earth and the glorified bodies will be so great that by it we will be said to see God as though with the bodily eyes. Therefore, blessed are the clean of heart.

He resolves the text, no man has ever seen God (1 John 4:12), in three ways. First, that it will not be by a comprehensive vision; second, not with bodily eyes; third, not in this life: because if it were given to someone to see God in this life, this would be because he is entirely estranged and lifted above the bodily senses. And this is why he said, blessed are the clean of heart; because just as the eye seeing color must be free from impurities, so it is with the mind seeing God; think of the Lord in goodness, and seek him in simplicity of heart. For he is found by those who tempt him not: and he shows himself to those who have faith in him (Wis 1:1), for the heart is purified by faith. Purifying their hearts by faith (Acts 15:9). And because vision follows upon faith, therefore it is said, for they will see God.

435. Blessed are the clean of heart, namely those who have a general cleanness from unworthy thoughts, by which their heart is a holy temple of God, in which they see God by contemplating; for ‘temple’ seems to be said from ‘contemplating.’ But in a particular way, blessed are the clean of heart, i.e., those who have cleanness of body; for nothing so impedes spiritual contemplation as uncleanness of body does. They obtain peace and holiness, without which no one will see God (Heb 12:14).

And therefore, some say that the moral virtues, especially chastity, advance one toward the contemplative life. And according to this, blessed are the clean of heart can be understood as about the vision in this life; for the saints who have a heart filled by justice see more excellently than some who see through bodily effects, for to the degree that effects are closer to God, to that degree God is more known through them. Hence the saints, who have justice, charity, and other such effects, which are most like God, know more than others. O taste, and see that the Lord is sweet (Ps 34:8).

436. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they will be called children of God. Here the seventh beatitude is set down; and, as was said, the virtues which dispose one to what is best dispose one to two things, namely to the vision of God and to love. And just as cleanness of heart disposes one to the vision of God, so peace disposes one to the love of God, by which we are called and are sons of God; and thus it disposes one to the love of neighbor, because, for he who loves not his brother, whom he sees, how can he love God, whom he does not see? (1 John 4:20).

437. And one should note that two rewards of beatitude are set down here, namely blessed are the peacemakers and blessed are the clean of heart. And all the preceding beatitudes are reduced to these two, and these are the effects of all the preceding. For what is caused by poverty of spirit, by mourning, by meekness, except that one has a clean heart? What by justice and mercy, except that we have peace? And the work of justice will be peace, and the service of justice quietness, and security for ever (Isa 32:17).

438. Blessed therefore are the peacemakers. But one should see what peace is, and how we can arrive at it.

Peace is the tranquillity of order. Now, order is the arrangement allotting the proper place to equals and unequals. Therefore peace resides in this, that all hold their own places. Hence the mind of man ought first to be subject to God. Second, the motions and inferior powers which are common to us and the brutes should be subject to man, for man has dominion over the animals by reason; let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moves upon the earth (Gen 1:26). Third, that a man have peace toward others, because thus he will be entirely ordered.

However, this ordering can only exist in holy men; much peace have they who love your law (Ps 119:165); there is no peace to the wicked (Isa 48:22), for they cannot have interior peace. They lived in a great war of ignorance, they call so many and such great evils peace (Wis 14:22). Such peace the world cannot give; not as the world gives, do I give unto you (John 14:27). Similarly, all this is not enough, but they ought to make peace among those who quarrel; joy follows those who take counsels of peace (Prov 12:20).

Nevertheless, one should know that this peace is begun here, but not perfected, because no one can have the animal movements entirely subject to reason; but I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind, and captivating me in the law of sin, that is in my members (Rom 7:23). Hence true peace will be in eternal life; in peace in the same I will sleep, and I will rest (Ps 4:9); and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding (Phil 4:7).

439. For they will be called children of God, for three reasons. The first is because they have the duty of a son of God, for the Son is said to have come into the world for this purpose, that he might gather together the scattered; for he is our peace (Eph 2:14); making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven (Col 1:20). Second, because through peace with charity one arrives at the eternal kingdom, in which all will be called sons of God; behold how they are numbered among the children of God, and their lot is among the saints (Wis 5:5). Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph 4:3).Third, because a man is made like God by this, because where there is peace, there is no resistance; but no one can resist God. Who has resisted him, and has had peace? (Job 9:4).

440. And one should note that these beatitudes add onto one another. For it is greater to obtain mercy than to have one’s fill, because to have one’s fill is to complete what is proportioned to oneself, but mercy goes beyond oneself. Similarly, not all who receive mercy are admitted by the king to see the king. Similarly, it is more to be a son of the king than to see the king.

441. And yet one should know that by all these beatitudes one reward is designated.

But why did the Lord will to signify it through many things this way?

One should say that all things which are divided in lower things are brought together in higher things. And since in human affairs those things are found scattered about, and we are led by the hand through sensible things, for this reason the Lord signified the eternal reward through many things.

442. Now, this seventh beatitude is adapted to the gift of wisdom, for wisdom makes men to be sons of God.

One should note likewise that peace is placed in the seventh beatitude, just as rest in the seventh day (Gen 2:2).

443. Next is set down the eighth beatitude, which indicates the perfection of all the preceding beatitudes; for a man is perfect in all these things when he does not give up at all because of afflictions. The furnace tries the potter’s vessels, and the trial of affliction just men (Sir 27:6). Blessed therefore are they who suffer persecution.

But perhaps someone hearing blessed are the peacemakers would say that these men are not blessed on account of persecution, because persecution disturbs peace, or takes it away entirely. But certainly not interior peace, but exterior peace; much peace have they that love your law (Ps 119:165).

Now, the persecution itself does not make one blessed, but the cause of the persecution; hence he says, for justice’s sake; but if also you suffer any thing for justice’s sake, blessed are you (1 Pet 3:14). Chrysostom: he does not say, ‘from the pagans and for the faith,’ but for justice’s sake.¹

444. The prophets were killed, not because they denied the faith, but because they announced the truth; John the Baptist was killed because he announced the truth, and he was a martyr.

And it should be noted that this beatitude is set down in the eighth place, just as circumcision, in which a certain general circumcision of martyrs is foretold, also happened on the eighth day.

445. For theirs is the kingdom (Matt 5:10). This seems to be the same as what is said in the first beatitude, hence it is explained in several ways by the saints. For certain people say that it is the same thing to say blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven (Matt 5:3), and this one is for the sake of indicating the perfection of patience, as in James (Jas 1:4). But perfection is always indicated by the fact that it returns to its own beginning, as appears in a circle. Similarly, someone who suffers persecution for justice’s sake is poor and is due all things, for he is meek (Matt 5:4) and merciful (Matt 5:5), and so on with all of them. And therefore, not only the first reward is owed to him, but all rewards. Others say that it is not the same thing; hence Ambrose says that it refers to the kingdom of heaven as to the glory of the soul and body; for the kingdom of heaven corresponds to the virtue of the soul, but the beatitude corresponds to martyrdom which consists in the glorification of bodies because of the punishments they have suffered. Or it can be another way: the kingdom of heaven is promised to the poor in hope, because they do not immediately carry it off, but to the martyrs in reality, because they do carry it off immediately.

Persecution and reward

5:11 Blessed are you when they will revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: [n. 446]

5:12 Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you. [n. 448]

446. Blessed are you. Here he touches on the dignity of those who must teach the very teaching of the apostles. And it should be known that all beatitudes pertain to three things, for the first three are about removing an evil, namely, blessed are the poor (Matt 5:3), blessed are the meek (Matt 5:4), and blessed those who mourn (Matt 5:5); the next four are about the working of good; but the last pertains to patiently enduring evil. But those three should be in the teacher of Sacred Scripture in a most excellent way, for in undergoing evils he should not only patiently endure, but should rejoice; likewise he should remove evils from others; similarly in the third, he should light the way to the good. Hence in these three things he commissions apostolic dignity in order, and he begins with persecution because by this the perfection of all the others is designated, and it signifies that no one should assume the office of preacher unless he is perfect, the learning of a man is known by patience (Prov 19:11), and they will endure well (Ps 92:14).

Concerning this he does three things:

first, he enumerates the evils which they were to undergo;

second, he teaches the manner of suffering: rejoice and exult;

third, he assigns a reason: for your reward.

447. But evils are either present or absent; also, they become present in word and in deed: hence he sets forth the whole. Therefore he says, blessed are you.

But Augustine raises this question, for first he says when they will revile you, and afterward, and speak all that is evil against you, which seems to be the same thing. But it should be known that they revile who inflict abuses on sight, but they speak all that is evil who detract from those who are absent. For they revile those to whom many taunts are made: all curse me (Jer 15:10); or who when he was reviled, did not return abuse (I Peter 2:23). Therefore, blessed when they revile you, i.e., when they offend you in word and in deed. Chrysostom: the meriting of life eternal consists in two things: in doing the good and suffering evil, and just as any good deed, however little, is not lacking in merit, so also every injury has its reward. And persecute you, i.e., by driving you out of town after town: we are reviled and we bless (1 Cor 4:12); and further in this text, behold I send to you prophets and scribes and some of them . . . will persecute you from city to city (Matt 23:34). And they will speak, i.e., they will fabricate and accuse you of many evils, as deceivers (2 Cor 6:8), if you be reproached for the name of Christ (1 Pet 4:14). But it should be known that not everyone about whom evils are said is blessed, but it is required first that it be said falsely, and second for the sake of Christ; hence he says, untruly and for my sake; and this for my sake refers to all the things mentioned. Again, observe that it is the same when he says for my sake and above, for the sake of Christ.

448. Rejoice. Here he teaches the manner, that is, how evils are to be borne. Above, when he was speaking about all things, he said blessed are they who suffer (Matt 5:10), i.e., who do not resent; but in apostles this does not suffice, but on the contrary, they must exult: count it all joy (James 1:2); the apostles went rejoicing (Acts 5:41).

449. And he says, rejoice and exult. There it should be known that to be delighted, to exult, to rejoice, and to be happy, are the same according to the thing, but differ in account. For delight is properly from the union of the very thing loved and the one coming together with it; joy is not only in this union but also in the apprehension of it; interior happiness and exultation are the effects resulting from joy and delight, for by these things the heart is enlarged: wherefore ‘laetitia’, happiness, is like ‘latitia’, largeness. Likewise, not only is the heart enlarged internally, but when it is signified externally, it appears, and then it is called exultation as something appearing without.

But one should rejoice because it will be to the confusion of unbelievers and the joy of believers; in this way blessed Laurence rejoiced on the rack, as it is written of him. And the reason for joy is twofold: first, the reward, hence for your reward is very great in heaven, namely, in the fiery one; hence and so will we be always with the Lord (I Thess 4:16). Augustine: in the fact that he says in heaven, he names the object of beatitude and the substance which will not be in bodily things but in spiritual ones, namely, in the enjoyment of God; and those spiritual goods are denoted by the heavens because of their solidity and firmness. And he says very great because of the superabundant reward of the apostles: a good measure (Luke 6:38); every one will receive his own reward (I Cor 3:8); I God am . . . your reward (Gen 15:1). The second reason is that rejoicing is an example, hence for so they persecuted the prophets. For it is a great comfort when someone becomes like great men and forefathers: which of the prophets did your ancestors not persecute? (Acts 7:52); take the prophets, my brethren, for an example (James 5:10). And note that in this the dignity of Christ is indicated, for he has his own prophets suffering for his sake, just as in the Old Testament, and also the dignity of the apostles, which is likened to the prophets.

Salt of the earth

5:13 You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt lose its savor, wherewith will it be salted? It is good for nothing any more but to be cast out, and to be trodden on by men. [n. 450]

5:14 You are the light of the world. A city set on a mountain cannot be hidden. [n. 456]

450. You are the salt. Above, the Lord shows the dignity of the apostles by the fact that in tribulations they would not only be suffering, but even rejoicing. But now he speaks of their excellence in the fact that they must deter others from evils, and thus he compares them to salt: you are.

And concerning this he does two things:

first, he defines their office as preventing others from evils;

second, he shows how they must protect themselves from evils, at but if salt loses its savor.

451. Therefore he says, you are the salt. He compares them to salt for four reasons.

First, because of the generation of salt, which is from water and wind and the heat of the sun: for the spiritual generation is from the water of baptism and the power of the Holy Spirit: unless someone is born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5); and from the heat of the sun which is the fervor of love that comes from the Holy Spirit, the love of God has been poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given to us (Rom 5:5). Second, because of the uses of salt, the first of which is that all things are seasoned with salt: hence he signifies the wisdom that apostolic men should have, for the wisdom of doctrine (Sirach 6:23); walk in the wisdom of God toward those who are without (Col 4:5).

The second reason was in Leviticus, for in every sacrifice salt was added (Lev 2:13), for the apostolic teaching should shine out of our every work.

The third reason is that it consumes an excess of humors and by doing so, it preserves from rotting: and in the same way the apostles curbed carnal desires through their teaching: for the time past is sufficient (I Pet 4:3); not in rioting (Rom 13:13).

The fourth effect is that it renders the earth sterile: hence it is said that some conquerors sowed salt outside the city they had seized so that nothing would grow; so also the evangelical teaching makes the earth sterile, namely so that earthly works do not spring up in us: have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness (Eph 5:11). Therefore the apostles are called salt because they have the sting of withdrawing from sins: have salt in you (Mark 9:49).

452. But someone might say: ‘It is enough that I have salt; it is not at all necessary that the virtues of salt preserve you from sin,’ and to this four arguments can be made.

453. The first is taken from incorrigibility, hence but if salt loses its savor. Those things properly lose their savor which lose their virtue: like strong wine when it loses its virtue, so also salt when it loses its bite: if salt became bland, wherewith will you season it? (Mark 9:49). Hence someone loses his salt when he falls into sin: they became vain in their thoughts (Rom 1:21). If therefore because of tribulations or something else you fall from the truth, with what will you be salted, i.e., by what other salt will it be salted? For if the masses sin, they can be corrected, but if a prelate does, nothing can repair it: how long will they be incapable of innocence? (Hos 8:5). And it should be noted that it says, but if the salt should grow insipid (Luke 14:34): for it is a great insipidity to forgo eternal goods for temporal ones.

454. The second reason is taken from usefulness, hence good for nothing, and Luke explains this: neither for the land nor for the dunghill (Luke 14:35), for it makes the earth sterile and it does not fertilize the dunghill. So are spiritual men good for nothing when they sin, because they are not good for secular affairs, like soldiers and such: son of man, what will be made of the wood of the vine? (Ezek 15:2); all have gone aside (Ps 53:3).

455. The third reason is taken from imminent danger, and it has two branches according to the two dangers. The first is expulsion, hence but to be cast out, of the Church, that is: without are dogs (Rev 22:15). Again, that the dignity of priestly magisterium is taken away: because you have rejected knowledge . . . you shall not do the office of priesthood for me (Hos 4:6), and below: the kingdom of God will be taken from you (Matt 21:43), and here it is nothing but to be cast out. The second danger is vilification, because those who live spiritually at first, but then fail, become contemptible, and this is and to be trodden on: this man began to build (Luke 14:30); you have departed out of the way, and have caused many to stumble at the law (Mal 2:8). And according to Augustine it should be noted that if certain holy men are vilified, as is said above, and they speak all that is evil against you (Matt 5:11), nevertheless they can never be trampled underfoot, for they always have their hearts in heaven, and only those can be trampled who are lying on the earth.

456. You are the light. Here is set forth the third dignity of apostles. For just as they must deter others from evils, so they must also illuminate. And concerning this he does two things: first, he shows their dignity; second, he removes faintheartedness, at a city . . . cannot be hidden.

Therefore he says you are the light of the world, as though not of Judea alone or of Galilee, but of the whole world: for thus the Lord commanded: I have set you as a light to the gentiles (Acts 13:47). And this was marvelous because they were scarcely known in their own land, and nevertheless their sound has gone out to all the earth (Ps 19:4). But it is objected that it seems that what he calls light applies only to Christ: that man was not the light and later, he was the true light (John 1:8–9). It should be said that light essentially is only Christ, but the apostles are called light illuminated, that is, by participation, as the eye is light illuminating and nevertheless illuminated.

And note that these three, namely, blessed are you when they revile you (Matt 5:11), and you are the salt and you are the light, seem to pertain to the three last beatitudes, namely to blessed are they who suffer persecution (Matt 5:10), the second to blessed are the peacemakers (Matt 5:9), since namely, they make peace in themselves and others, and the third to blessed are the clean of heart (Matt 5:8). For if the apostles were excellent in these three last things, much more would they be in the ones above.

457. The Lord had said blessed are you when they revile you (Matt 5:11) and who suffer persecution (Matt 5:10); therefore they could say: we will undergo so many persecutions, therefore we want to hide. And thus the Lord removes the resulting faintheartedness, hence a city . . . cannot be hidden.

And first, he forbids hiding away;

second, he shows the way that they must make themselves visible, at so let your light shine (Matt 5:16).

He proves by two reasons that they must not hide themselves away: first, because they could not even if they wished to; second, because they should not, and this is neither do men light a lamp (Matt 5:15).

The light of the world

5:14 You are the light of the world. A city set on a mountain cannot be hidden. [n. 458]

5:15 Neither do men light a lamp and put it under a bushel, but upon a lampstand, that it may shine to all who are in the house. [n. 459]

5:16 So let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven. [n. 462]

5:17 Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. [n. 463]

458. A city . . . cannot be hidden. The city was the congregation of believers, namely, that very gathering of the apostles: glorious things are said of you, city of God (Ps 87:3). But it was situated on a mountain, namely, in Christ: the mountain of the house of the Lord (Isa 2:2); a stone was cut out of a mountain (Dan 2:34). Or, on a mountain, that is, in the perfection of justice: your justice like the mountains (Ps 36:6). But a city situated on a mountain cannot be hidden, and so it is with the apostles.

Chrysostom: if men in the lowest station should sin, they can escape notice, but if those in the highest station do, they cannot escape notice: the eyes of all Israel are upon you (1 Kgs 1:20). Hilary explains it another way, and the meaning is about the same: the city on a mountain is Christ, for on the part of his human nature in which he shares with us, he is the city: I have made you this day a fortified city (Jer 1:18); he is on the mountain because he is in divinity which is the mountain: the mountain of God is a fat mountain (Ps 68:15). And therefore Christ could not remain hidden: and thus you, apostles, should not hide me.

459. According to that neither do men light, as it were: ‘let us define what might remain hidden, although you should not hide yourselves.’ For no one receiving a benefit should do something against the intention of the one giving it. God gave you knowledge so that you might share it: as every man has received grace (1 Pet 4:9–11). And this is neither do men light a lamp, men indeed, or the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit. By lamp can be understood first the Gospel teaching: a lamp to my feet (Ps 119:105), for a lamp has light as part of it; the light of truth is set down in Sacred Scripture, but it is lit by the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Or by lamp the apostles can be understood, in the fact that the light of grace is brought in to them: John . . . was a burning and a shining light (John 5:35); I have prepared a lamp for my anointed (Ps 132:17). Or by lamp can mean Christ, for just as a lamp is a light in a clay jar, so is his divinity in his humanity: you are my lamp (2 Sam 22:29).

460. If lamp is taken in this way, we can understand three things by bushel. First, according to Augustine, corporeal things, for two reasons: first, because a bushel is a measure, you will have a just and a true weight (Deut 25:15)); but what we do in the body will be rendered back to us: for we must all be manifested before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive the proper things of the body (2 Cor 5:10). Or because all bodies are subject to measure, but divine things are infinite, since they are outside measure. Therefore, they set the lamp under a bushel who suit their teaching to temporal convenience, hence it is costly. Against which the Apostle says, we never came with words of flattery (1 Thess 2:5). In the second way, according to Chrysostom, secular men are called a bushel basket, for they are empty above and solid below: for above they are frenzied because they perceive nothing from the Holy Spirit: the sensual man perceives not these things that are of the Spirit of God (1 Cor 2:14); but below, namely in secular affairs, they are wise: the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light (Luke 16:8); and that is the more literal exposition. Therefore according to this a lamp is set under a bushel when the teaching is hidden in worldly fear: who are you that you should fear from a man? (Isa 51:12); I labor even unto chains (2 Tim 2:9). But if by the lamp is understood Gospel teaching or Christ, then the bushel can be understood as the synagogue: for Christ did not become incarnate in order to remain hidden in Judea, but so that he might reveal himself to the whole world, I have given you to be the light of the Gentiles (Isa 49:6).

461. But upon a lampstand. This is explained in three ways, for by the lampstand can be meant the body, and by the lamp, the Gospel teaching; hence the same thing is meant by the bushel and the lampstand, as it were: the Gospel teaching should not be subjected to temporal things, but they should administer all things to themselves: hence when you give things, your body and even your life up to death for the love of Christ, then you set your lamp upon a lampstand. Or, by the lampstand is understood a church, for those who are lamps are placed in high places, as the lamp shining upon the holy lampstand (Sir 26:22). But if lamp is understood to mean Christ, then the lampstand means the cross: through the blood of his cross (Col 1:20).

462. That it may shine to all. This is also explained in three ways. By the house can be understood the Church: so that you may know how you ought to behave in the house of God, which is the Church (1 Tim 3:15). Or the house is the whole world, for every house is built (Heb 3:4).

Following is set down how they should make themselves known. And first he sets down the mode, for they must shine before men, enlightening them: but to me, the least among all the saints is given this grace to preach among the gentiles (Eph 3:8); and the order, so that men may see: show me your faith without works and I will show you, by works, my faith (Jas 2:18); the end, for it is not for the sake of their own glory: for we are not as many, adulterating the word of God (2 Cor 2:17), and that is: and glorify: for on account of the glory of God we should do good works so that God might be glorified in a good life: whether you eat or drink . . . do all for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31).

463. Do not think. Note here that the Lord has fulfilled the law in five ways: first, because he himself fulfilled those things that were prefigured: what is written must be fulfilled in me (Luke 22:37); second, by observing legal things: when the fullness of time was come, God sent his son (Gal 4:4); third, by working through grace, namely in sanctifying by the Holy Spirit, which the law was unable to do: God has done what was impossible to the law (Rom 8:3); fourth, by satisfying for the sins by which we had been made transgressors of the law: hence having borne the transgression, he fulfilled the law: whom God proposed to be a propitiation (Rom 3:25); fifth, by applying certain perfections to the law which either related to the understanding of the law, or to a greater perfection of justice. Note that there are three ways of doing away with the law: either by completely denying it, or by explaining it wrongly, or by not fulfilling its morals.

Fulfillment of the law

5:17 Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. [n. 464]

5:18 For amen I say unto you, until heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle will not pass of the law, until all be fulfilled. [n. 471]

5:19 He therefore who will break one of these least commandments, and so teach men, will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. But he who will do and teach, he will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. [n. 471]

464. Do not think. Having set down the beatitude that the teaching of Christ relates to, here he begins to promulgate his own teaching. And first he makes clear his intention; second, he proposes the rule and commands of his teaching, at for I say to you (Matt 5:20).

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he makes clear his intention;

second, he shows the reason for its fulfillment, at amen.

465. Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he excludes what might be supposed as his intention;

second, he supplies the true intention, at I am not come.

466. The Lord had said to his apostles, blessed are you when they will revile you (Matt 5:11); hence the apostles might suspect that such a teaching was to be handed on that they had to hide themselves, as though Christ were saying something against the Law; and thus the Lord excludes this by saying, do not think. And again the same thing since it could be said that no other prophet, after Moses who gave it, did away with the Law, therefore the Lord says that he will do it fully, hence but to fulfill: for no one had fulfilled it.

And note that this word is most effective against those who condemn the law as though it were from the devil: for the Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8). But he himself acknowledges, I am not come to destroy the law: therefore it is not a work of the devil. By this argument a certain man was converted to the faith, and became a fellow preacher. Hence the Manichees abhor greatly this chapter; hence Faustus objects many times against Augustine. And all the objections are reduced to three. The first is from the authority of the law: for it says in Deuteronomy: let no word be added to the word that I speak to you, nor will you take anything away from it (Deut 4:2); but Christ did add to it: therefore he acted against the law. Again, Christ said that he was the institutor of the new law, later in this text: this is my blood (Matt 26:28); therefore he has destroyed the old. Third, for I have given you an example (John 13:15); therefore every action of Christ is true instruction; thus if he observed the law, we also must observe it. Therefore we must be circumcised and keep all the legal prescriptions. And this is the shared claim of Nazarenes and Manichees.

467. Therefore Faustus said that either Jesus did not say these words, but Matthew, who was not present for this sermon, said this, while John who was present did not say this; or that if Matthew wrote what Christ said, the Gospel is explained some other way.

For in Sacred Scripture the law is set forth three ways: because in the law of God there is the Mosaic law: we are freed from the law of death (Rom 7:6); there is the law of nature: for when the gentiles who have not the law do by nature what is of the law (Rom 2:14); and there is the law of truth, for the law of the Spirit of life delivered me from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2).

This is proved in three ways, then, namely: the old law; the law of nature which is among the gentiles, one of them a prophet of their own, said: the Cretans are always liars (Tit 1:12); and the law of truth, Therefore behold I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes (Matt 23:34).

Therefore what he says here, I am not come to destroy, is to be understood concerning the law of nature or of truth, for it also existed among certain of the ancient fathers; and the sign of this is that the Lord, when he was speaking of the commandments, seemed to approve some of them, and not others, namely, those that are properly of the law of Moses, namely that eye for an eye and the ones like it.

468. But Augustine objects against these things in the following way. First, because whoever denies something of the Gospel, by the same reasoning could deny anything else and thus render Scripture void; but the man of faith must believe whatever things are in the Scriptures. Again, because he says he speaks about another law and prophets, it is false, for in the whole New Testament, everywhere law is mentioned, it is understood to be about the law of Moses, to them belong . . . the giving of the law (Rom 9:4); therefore also the Lord is speaking of these things.

469. Hence it should be seen first how Christ came to fulfill the law, and afterward we will resolve the arguments. Thus it should be known that Christ fulfilled the law and the prophets in five ways.

First, because those things that were prefigured in the law and the prophets concerning Christ, he fulfilled in his actions: what is written must be fulfilled in me (Luke 22:37).

Second, by observing the legal requirements to the letter, when the fullness of time had come, God sent his son (Gal 4:4).

Third, by working through grace, which the law of nature could not do: for every law is for the sake of making us just men, but Christ did this by the Holy Spirit: for what the law could not do, God has done by sending his own Son (Rom 8:3).

Fourth, according to Augustine, by satisfying for the sins by which we were made transgressors of the law; hence having borne the transgression he is said to have fulfilled the law: whom God proposed to be a propitiation (Rom 3:29).

Fifth, by applying certain perfections to the law which were either for the understanding of the law or for the greater perfection of justice, for the law brought nothing to perfection (Heb 7:19); and these things seem to be the intention of Christ, since, when he made mention of all legal restrictions, he added be you therefore perfect (Matt 5:48). Thus we resolve the arguments of Faustus as Augustine resolves them.

470. As for let no word be added (Deut 4:2), it should be said that Christ did not add, but expounded; for those men understood the act of homicide when he said, you shall not kill. Christ explained that it also forbade hatred and anger. Similarly, regarding in pronouncing a new he has made the first one old (Heb 8:13), it should be said that the new one is the same, for the former was a figure and the latter is the fulfillment of figures. As to what we should observe, it should be said that something can be signified by speech and figure, and not be different, however it is signified. Before Christ was born it could have been said: Christ will be born and will die, but now it is said: Christ was born, and that sort of thing, and yet by this is illustrated that future events and completed ones are expressed by different words. Hence what was signified by figures as being in the future, when it has happened is signified in the present by new figures, namely the sacraments of the new law. Hence although Christ observed the law, nevertheless because the truth has come whoever observed it now would do injury to the truth. Thus I am not come to destroy, is understood this way.

471. Amen I say to you. Here the reason for the fulfillment is set forth, and it seems a threefold reason is assigned: first from the unmoving character of the law, second from the penalty for those doing away with it, third from the reward for those fulfilling it; the second is at he therefore who will break one of these least commandments, the third at who will break . . . and so teach.

Thus he says amen. And it should be known that all the mysteries of Christ were prefigured in the old law; but as is said in Amos: the Lord will do nothing without revealing his word to his servants (Amos 3:7), therefore the mysteries of Christ will last until the end times, as is said here, behold, I am with you, (Matt 28:20).

Hence not all mysteries of the prophets were fulfilled in the first coming of Christ, nor will they be fulfilled before the end of the world. And what he said cannot be changed: has the Lord said then and will he not do? (Num 23:19); therefore if the law predicted these things that are in the future it is also fitting that they happen of necessity. Hence he says amen I say, that is, all things will be fulfilled in succession until the end of the world.

It should be known that amen is Hebrew, and no translator has dared to change this word out of reverence, for the Lord used it frequently. And it is taken sometimes in force of a noun, hence amen: truth; sometimes it is an adverb, i.e., truly, and so it is taken here; sometimes it stands for fiat: ‘so be it’; hence in the Psalm where we have ‘fiat’ for the Hebrew ‘amen’. Hence the verse says, for ‘vero’, ‘truly’; for ‘fiat’, ‘amen’ is said. Hence the Lord here excites the attention of his listeners.

472. Until heaven and earth pass, not according to their substance but according to their disposition, for the fashion of this world is passing away (1 Cor 7:31), the day of God when the heavens will burn (2 Pet 3:12). Until: until the end of the world.

Jot. Iota among the Greeks is the letter that we call small ‘i’; but among the Hebrews it is called ioth; and iota among the Greeks means ‘y’ and is the ninth letter; for all letters signify a certain number, hence it belongs to the perfection of the decalogue, and perhaps for this reason he says jot rather than ioth, according to what the saints say. Tittle is the mark at the top of a letter in Hebrew as well as in Greek, but they mean different things, since among the Hebrews aleph sometimes sounds like ‘a’ and sometimes like ‘e’, and this is known by certain points which here are called tittles; while among the Greeks certain marks are written above the letters to distinguish aspirations and accents, and those are what are called tittles among the Greeks. Therefore the Lord means that nothing is so unimportant that it need not be fulfilled.

473. He therefore who will break. Here the second argument is set down, and it is taken from the penalty of those who break the law, as it were: whoever breaks the law will be liable to the penalty as a transgressor of divine observance. However there are lesser commandments, according to Chrysostom, commandments of Christ; hence who will break one of these least commandments which I am about to tell you. And he continues thus: for the law cannot be broken, therefore, by the fact that I do not do away with it, whoever does will be liable to the penalty. And those things are called least first because of humility, as someone might call himself small, as in: unless you . . . become like children (Matt 18:3); or they are called least as regards the transgression because he sins less who breaks it, but there are greater things than the law that Christ commands as regards observance, for the law commands: you shall not kill, but Christ commands not to grow angry.

474. Augustine says otherwise, as well as Jerome: he speaks literally about the least precepts that are in the law because he says jot and tittle; and they are called the least things because the chief things are love the Lord your God, and your neighbor (Mark 12:30–31); hence certain observances are called least precepts, like many in Leviticus 19. And he says this to confront the Pharisees, for Pharisees transgressed many things for the sake of their observances, as he says later in this Gospel: then you have made void the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition (Matt 15:6). But the law is made void in three ways: first by completely denying it, second by interpreting it badly, and third by not observing its morals.

475. And so teach. He does badly who acts badly, but he does worse who teaches others to act badly: you have there some who hold to the teaching of Balaam (Rev 2:14); and thus he says, who will break one of these least commandments and so teach men, i.e., to break the commandments. And according to this it seems that whoever breaks the commandments will be in the kingdom of heaven.

But it should be known that according to Augustine, the kingdom of heaven here is taken for eternal life, and the Lord wanted to convey that no one will be there who will break one of these least commandments and so teach men, for none will be there but the great: whom he justified (Rom 8:30). Hence whoever is too small will never enter. Second, according to Rabbanus, men seek fame among men because this is a certain glory, that a man be considered great in the kingdom of men; but who will break . . . will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven, not existing here: for there a man is considered small for transgressing the commandments, and even smaller for teaching the transgression. And this is good enough.

Chrysostom says otherwise: Scripture sometimes calls the final judgment the kingdom of heaven, as it says: the Lord has reigned (Ps 99:1); and there there will be different orders, but least will be the one who taught others to transgress the commandments, because to the kingdom of heaven, by this reading, even those who are in hell would belong. Gregory takes it for the Church, hence: he will be called least in the Church, because whose life is despised it remains that his preaching is condemned.

Who will . . . and so teach. Great is the man who does well, greater still the one who does it and teaches others; hence he will have great glory, whoever will confess me (Matt 10:32); for in all things you have magnified your people (Wis 19:20).

Against homicide

5:20 For I say to you, that unless your justice abound more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven. [n. 478]

5:21 You have heard that it was said to those of old: you shall not kill. And whoever will kill, will be liable to the judgment. [n. 482]

5:22 But I say to you, that whoever is angry with his brother, will be liable to the judgment. And whoever will say to his brother: raca, will be liable to the council. And whoever will say: fool, will be liable to hell fire. [n. 485]

5:23 If therefore you offer your gift at the altar, and there you remember that your brother has anything against you; [n. 494]

5:24 Leave there your offering before the altar, and go first to be reconciled to your brother: and then coming you will offer your gift. [n. 494]

5:25 Be in agreement with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him: lest perhaps the adversary deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be cast in prison. [n. 497]

5:26 Amen I say to you, you will not go out from there until you repay the last farthing. [n. 501]

476. For I say to you, that unless your justice abound. Above, the Lord shows that it was not his intention to do away with the law, but to fulfill it; wherefore, here he begins to fulfill it. In the law there are four things: namely, moral precepts, judicial ones, figures, and promises. Three of these, namely, the moral precepts, the promises, and the judicial ones, the Lord fulfilled by his words, i.e., he teaches us to fulfill them. But he fulfilled the figures by his deed in his passion.

Hence this part is divided into three:

in the first, he fulfills the law as to the moral precepts,

in the second, as to the promises,

in the third, as to the judicial precepts.

477. There are two kinds of moral precepts: some are prohibitive and some permissive; first he fulfills the first kind, then the second kind, at it has been said: ‘whoever will put away’ (Matt 5:31).

Concerning the first, he does two things:

first, he prohibits homicide;

second, adultery, at you have heard . . . ‘do not commit adultery’ (Matt 5:27).

Concerning the first he does two things:

first, he sets down the necessity;

second, the fulfillment, at you have heard.

478. Therefore he says but I say to you. Note that justice is taken in two ways: for sometimes it is a certain particular virtue, one of the four cardinal virtues, and it has a certain determinate matter, namely, commutable goods useful for life. At other times, it refers to a general virtue that is a common virtue, which the Philosopher calls legal justice, which has to do with the keeping of the law: and it is taken this way here.

More than that of the scribes. And he says of the scribes and Pharisees, for they were superior in the justice of the law because they added on certain observances; therefore in order to indicate the excellence of the New Testament, he shows that it transcends even their justice. Therefore it is said whoever is less in the kingdom of heaven, i.e., the Church, is greater than they are. Therefore, this is the sense: unless your justice abounds, that is, unless your justice is more perfect than that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter.

479. And it should be known that the state of the Gospel is a middle one between the state of the law and that of glory, and this is clear from Galatians: the Apostle compares the state of the law to a child, and the Gospel to advanced age, hence he says, when we were children (Gal 4:3), and afterwards, the law was our pedagogue (Gal 3:24), and when I was a child, I spoke as a child (1 Cor 13:11). Therefore, it is a middle state, and this is natural, for no one can arrive at the end without crossing through something else; for no one can arrive at old age unless he passes through childhood. In this way the Lord says one cannot arrive at the state of the kingdom of heaven unless he climbs through all the rest.

Likewise, a better reward is gained by greater labor: he who sows sparingly will reap sparingly (2 Cor 9:6); but in the law, temporal and earthly things are promised: If you be willing and listen to me, you will eat of the good things of the land (Isa 1:19). But here heavenly goods are promised, therefore, the justice in us must exceed, for a greater reward is expected.

480. But it is objected against the Lord’s saying unless your justice abounds, that the justice of the law consists in observing the decalogue; but anyone who fulfills the precepts of the decalogue will have eternal life: if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments (Matt 19:17). And it is solved in two or three ways. First, because observers of the decalogue could never enter except in faith and by the redemption of the blood of Christ, for if justice comes by the law, then Christ died in vain (Gal 2:21). And thus it must be said that that passage, but if you will enter into life (Matt 19:17), should be understood as assuming faith; but the scribes and Pharisees did not have faith; but Israel, by following after the law of justice, did not arrive at the law of justice. Why not? Because they sought it not by faith but of works (Rom 9:31–32). And this is a good enough solution.

Another is that of Augustine, who says that all these observances that Christ makes are each contained in the old law, for there anger is also prohibited: you shall not hate your brother (Lev 19:17). Therefore, what did the Lord add to this? It should be said that he adds something with respect to the corrupt understanding of the scribes and Pharisees, for they believed that in that precept you shall not kill, they were not forbidden from anything except out of fear of an act, the act of homicide. Hence the Lord explains this and thus he does not simply say: unless your justice is greater than the law, but greater than that of the scribes and Pharisees.

481. Still another solution, with Augustine: for Christ had said but he who will do and teach, (Matt 5:19), and, who will break (Matt 5:19); but Pharisees and scribes do not do and teach, as it says later: for they say, and do not (Matt 23:3). Therefore, unless your justice abounds, that is, what you say, you must also do, or you will not enter in.

But there remains another question, for the Lord said he therefore who will break . . . will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven (Matt 5:19), and whoever does not abound will not enter; therefore, whoever breaks the law will enter.

And Chrysostom resolves this by saying it is one thing to be in a kingdom and another thing to enter it: for properly speaking, those enter who have a part in the rule of the kingdom, but those are in it who dwell in it somewhere; hence, even those who are kept in prison are said to be in the kingdom. So also it is of heaven, for those who are almost condemned are in the kingdom, but they do not participate in ruling.

Augustine says otherwise, that by this we can understand that the kingdom of heaven is said in two ways: one in which no one enters unless he has justice, and this is eternal life; another in which those enter who break the commandments, and this is the present Church.

482. You have heard that it was said to those of old: ‘you shall not kill.’ Here is set forth the fulfillment of the precept. And concerning this he does three things: first he sets forth the precepts, second he fulfills them, third he warns about observing the fulfillment; the second is at but I say to you, the third at if therefore you offer. Concerning the first, he does two things: first he sets down the precepts about the prohibition of homicide, second, the penalty for homicide.

Therefore he says you have heard that ‘you shall not kill’ (Exod 20:13; Deut 5:17); and he says to them of old because, according to Chrysostom, just as if a teacher says to one of his disciples: for a long time I have taught you these basics, the time has come that you learn greater things; so with the Lord, since the time is coming when you will be teachers, you need to be taught (Heb 5:12).

483. And it must be noted that in this precept a threefold error was made, for certain men said that it was not permitted to kill even small animals; but this is false, for it is no sin to use the things that are subjected to the power of man, for it is the natural order that plants be for the nourishment of animals and certain animals be for the nourishment of others; and all things are for the nourishment of man: every moving thing that lives will be food for you, just as I gave you the green plants (Gen 9:3). And the Philosopher also says in the Politics that hunting is like just war.

Second, there is an error of certain men who said: ‘you shall not kill’ means men; hence they call it homicide when secular judges sentence people according to the laws. Against this Augustine says that God did not remove from himself the power of killing, hence I will kill and I will make live (Deut 32:39); therefore it is permitted to those who kill by the command of God, for God is the one who does it. But every law is a command from God: by me kings reign (Prov 8:15); he does not bear the sword in vain for he is God’s minister (Rom 13:4). Therefore ‘you shall not kill’ is to be understood by proper authority.

484. The third error is that some believed ‘you shall not kill’ someone else, but to kill oneself is permitted, for this is found in the story of Samson, and also Cato and certain virgins who threw themselves into a fire, according to Augustine. But Augustine answers that whoever kills himself, kills a man, for one cannot kill another except by God’s authority, nor oneself except by the will of God or the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and in this way he excuses Samson.

But whoever will kill. Here he sets down the punishment: will be liable to the judgment, i.e., the punishment that the law adjudicates (Exod 21:12).

485. But I say to you follows. Having laid out the precept of the old law, here the Lord fulfills it. And this fulfillment does not make the law void, but to the contrary acts to its greater fulfillment, for someone who gets angry is prone to homicide, but when he gets angry he does not commit homicide. It is somehow contained in this precept because that law was given by God, and there is a difference between the law of men and of God, for a man is judge of external actions, but God of internal ones: men see the things that appear (1 Sam 16:7); hence in this ‘you shall not kill’ is included also the motive for killing. But there is a twofold motive for hurting one’s neighbor, namely, anger and hatred; nor is hatred the same thing as hardened anger, but it is a predication by cause, for hatred happens from hardened anger. Therefore there is a difference, for anger does not seek evil for one’s neighbor unless inasmuch as it wants vengeance, hence vengeance accomplished quiets it. But in hatred, the very harming is desired for itself and the appetite is never quieted; therefore hatred is a more serious motive than anger. But God does not only prohibit the motive of hatred but also of anger, which is less grave: whoever hates his brother is in darkness (1 John 2:11).

But he sets down three levels of anger: the first level is the anger hiding in one’s heart, the second, anger appearing externally, and the third, anger erupting into harm. The first is at but I say to you, and Augustine says that the reading should be without cause, for the man who gets angry without cause will be liable to the judgment. Jerome, however, says that without cause is not in the text, for then an opening would be given to anger; but the Lord leaves no place for anger.

486. But surely not all anger is contrary to virtue? It should be known, as Augustine says, that concerning this there are two opinions among philosophers: for the Stoics said that no passion of the soul happens in the wise man, for to the contrary, they were the ones desiring true virtue. But the Peripatetics said that anger happens in the wise man, but is moderated, and this is a truer opinion: which is also clear by authority, for in the Gospels we find these passions sometimes attributed to Christ, in whom was the fullness of wisdom; also from reason, for if all passions were contrary to virtue, there would be certain powers of the soul that had no purpose but to harm, for they would not have any suitable act, and then the irascible and concupiscible powers would have been given to man in vain. And therefore it must be said that anger is sometimes a virtue, sometimes not.

But anger is taken in three ways: first, as it is in the judgment of reason alone without any disturbance of the soul; but this is not called anger, but judgment: for so the Lord seems bad and angry when punishing: I will bear the wrath of the Lord (Mic 7:9).

487. Second, it can be taken as a passion, and this is in the sensitive appetite, and it is twofold, for sometimes it is ordered by reason and contained within the limits of reason, namely, when one is angry as much as he should be, at what he should be, and so on; and then it is an act of virtue and is called anger from zeal. Hence the Philosopher also says that meekness is not never growing angry. And thus Chrysostom says that if anger were completely taken away, discipline would also be taken away. This kind, therefore, is no sin.

There is a third anger which escapes the judgment of reason, and this is always a sin, but sometimes a venial one and sometimes mortal, and this is determined by the worst impulse. For something is a mortal or venial sin in two ways: either from its genus or circumstances, or by the act and by consent; for example, homicide is an act of mortal sin by its genus because it is directly contrary to the divine precept, and thus consenting to homicide is a mortal sin; for if the act is mortal, consent is as well. Likewise, if it were a venial sin, consenting to it would be as well, and so on. But sometimes a sin is mortal by its genus, but nevertheless the movement is not a mortal sin, because it is without consent, just as when a movement of concupiscence arises toward fornication, if it is not consented to it is not mortal. Similarly, anger is a movement to avenge an inflicted injury; for this is properly anger. But if this movement, for example to homicide, is such that even reason is led astray, then even if the movement is only in the passion, it is a mortal sin; but if reason is not perverted, then it is venial. But if there is no movement with the genus of a mortal sin, then if the consent is given it is not mortal.

488. Therefore, what the Lord says, whoever is angry with his brother, will be liable to the judgment, is to be understood about the movement inclining to harm, which movement is a mortal sin if it is consented to: all things that are done God will bring into judgment (Eccl 12:14). And this is the but I say.

And note that no prophet speaking about the law of Moses spoke in this way: but I say to you, but nevertheless they preached observance of the law of Moses. By this it is clear that the Lord shows that he has authority, and he shows that he is the lawgiver when he says, but I say to you.

489. Accordingly he sets forth the second level of anger, namely when it appears externally without hastening to harm.

490. Raca, according to certain men, is not an expression signifying any definite concept, but an interjection of anger. According to Augustine, it is like ‘alas’, an interjection of suffering, and it signifies a certain feeling from which anger erupts externally, but not to the point of harm. According to Chrysostom, it is an interjection of spite, and sounds slighting. But either of these is forbidden, whether to show bitterness to one’s brother, as the Apostle says: all bitterness . . . be put away from you (Eph 4:31), or to despise him, why does everyone despise his brother? (Mal 2:10).

Or raca, according to others, is an expression signifying a definite concept, and according to this there are two opinions, for according to Augustine it means the same thing as ragged, from ‘rachos’, and this opinion agrees with that of Chrysostom. According to Jerome, raca means ‘empty’ or ‘inane’, hence raca is, as it were, ‘without a brain’, and it is a great insult, even an insult to the Holy Spirit, when a wise brother full of the Holy Spirit is called ‘empty-headed’: all were filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4).

491. But Chrysostom asks if ‘empty-headed’ is the same as ‘foolish’, then why did the Lord afterward say whoever will say: fool? And he said that in all idioms there are words used to injure, but the injury is done by the use and custom of speaking: raca then, can mean the same thing as fool, but not in the same use, for raca is said familiarly and it is a sin when it is said from anger.

Liable to the council. Augustine says: it is more before God to be liable to the council than to judgment, since up until the judgment, culpability is in question and it is uncertain whether someone is liable: observe these things without prejudice (1 Tim 5:21); but after someone is convicted of a crime he is no longer dealt with as master of himself, but the judges hand him over to the council for sentencing. Hilary says it means liable to the council of the saints, for whoever commits injury to the Holy Spirit deserves to be condemned by the saints. Chrysostom says that the Apostles explained it in this way: liable to the council, i.e., he would be considered among those who sat in the council against Christ.

492. But whoever will say: fool. This is the third level, which is when someone inflicts harm through words. And just as someone who says raca inflicts injury on the Holy Spirit, so whoever says fool, injures the Son of God, who became wisdom for us (1 Cor 1:30).

He will be liable to hell fire. This is the first place that mention is made of Gehenna, as no one had ever used this word before (cf. Dan 10). The Spirit of the Lord is held in earthen vessels just as in heaven. Around Jerusalem was a certain favorite valley called the valley of Topheth or of the sons of Annon; but in this valley the sons of Israel worshipped idols and God threatened them through Jeremiah that in that valley their dead bodies would be cast down, hence: that this place will no more be called Tophet, nor the valley of the sons of Ennom, but the valley of slaughter (Jer 19:6)

493. Gehenna, according to the Hebrews, is the same as the valley of Ennon. Therefore since in it many were struck down and killed by Nebuchadnezzar when they were coming down from Jerusalem, thus the Lord calls the place of hell Gehenna. For just as he transformed the earthly promises which were in the old law into heavenly and eternal goods, so he also exchanged the temporal punishments that the old law imposed for eternal punishments. But just as the crimes are related to each other, for it is worse to show anger externally than to hold it in, and it is worse still to inflict harm, so also the first is judgment, the second council, and the third a specific punishment. And all these things, i.e., judgment, council, gehenna, signify the punishment of hell. And he says it several times because he shows by this diversity of penalties that those will be punished the most who inflict harm.

But then a question arises. Do those who call a brother fool sin mortally? Some people say that he is speaking hyperbolically in order to frighten. But this is false, for the teaching of Christ is a teaching full of truth. Hence it should be known that the third includes the first and the second, and the second includes the first. In the first it is understood that anger is a mortal sin; and if someone erupts from it into words or violence, he sins mortally. It is likewise with whoever has said: fool, for there is anger which is a mortal sin. But the Apostle seems to have acted against these words: O senseless Galatians (Gal 3:1). It must be said that he was not speaking out of anger, but out of the necessity of justice, according to which also whipping is not a sin. And therefore Augustine says that when he said whoever grows angry, he added without cause, and in the second sentence and third he also says without cause. Nevertheless, according to him it has the same meaning even if he does not say without cause.

494. Afterward when he says if therefore you offer, having set down the fulfillment, he shows how it should be observed. And first, he shows how someone should act toward one he has injured; second, how someone should act toward one who has injured him, at be in agreement. Concerning the first he does three things: first, he sets down good advice; second, the obstacles to employing that good advice; third, the remedy. The second is at and there you remember; the third, at leave your offering.

Thus he says if . . . you offer, as it were: thus because you should not offend anyone, if you offer. By this we honor God in that we acknowledge that we were given all things by God: all things are yours, and we have given you what we have received from your hand (1 Chr 29:14). Similarly we honor the Church, for in this way the poor are supported by the Church: honor the Lord with your substance (Prov 3:9), for I am the Lord . . . I have made you (Isa 41:13–15). Before the altar, not among others joking; beware lest you offer your holocausts in every place that you will see, but in the place which the Lord will chose (Deut 12:13–14).

495. The obstacle is offending one’s neighbor; hence and there you remember. Note that sometimes you have something against your brother, sometimes your brother has something against you, namely when either you offend him or he offends you. But you should forbear, as the Apostle says: bearing with one another . . . if anyone has a complaint against another (Col 3:13). And so whoever is offended is not said to seek forgiveness from the one who offended, but vice versa, thus he says, and there you remember that your brother has anything against you, although according to Chrysostom it is even more perfect to do more than this: with those who hated peace I was peaceable (Psalm 120:7).

And he says there you remember, for perhaps beforehand you did not remember: so he gives a threefold counsel. First: leave your offering. The Lord never wants a good to be abandoned completely because of an evil that accompanies that good, but to refrain from the evil; a beast that may be sacrificed to the Lord, if anyone will vow, will be holy, and cannot be exchanged, i.e., neither a better for a worse, nor a worse for a better (Lev 27:9–10). And thus he says leave your offering, not stop, i.e., keep your plan and remove the obstacle. And this is and go first . . . to your brother.

496. But Augustine objects that if the Lord understands this literally then something unfitting follows, for one’s brother could be overseas. But it must be understood that if one has no opportunity of finding him, he must go there in his heart. You may also understand by altar the faith without which it is impossible to please God. Augustine even says that if he has also remembered before the altar a mortal sin, and he wishes to make his offering, if he had no opportunity to confess he can make his offering with contrition and the intention of confessing. Therefore, go to be reconciled, at least in one’s heart, and then coming you will offer; the Almighty does not approve the gifts of the wicked (Sir 34:23).

You will offer your gift: in this it is noted that by the exercise of charity toward one’s neighbor we come into the charity of God: if . . . he who loves not his brother whom he sees (1 John 4:20).

497. Be in agreement. Above the Lord set forth one useful instruction for the observance of this fulfillment; now he sets down another, and it can be developed in two ways from what went before. First in this way: the Lord taught above how you should treat someone you have hurt; now he teaches how you should deal with someone who has hurt you, and this is be in agreement. Or, in another way, so that adversary is taken broadly: either for someone who has hurt you, or someone you have hurt.

Thus the Lord teaches that you should be reconciled with your brother. Yet someone could say ‘I will be reconciled, but not right away.’ Thus the Lord says, quickly: let not the sun go down upon your anger (Eph 4:26). And it should be noted that, as Jerome says, in Greek, in agreement is a certain word that means ‘well-wisher’ or ‘clement’.

498. But it is asked who this adversary might be. And it should be known that there are five adversaries with whom we should be in agreement, namely man, the devil, the flesh, God, and the word of God. Concerning the first, hear the voice of adversaries (Jer 18:19). Concerning the second, let my enemy be as the ungodly and my adversary as the wicked one (Job 37:7). Concerning the third, for the flesh lusts against the spirit (Gal 5:17), and, but I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind (Rom 7:23). And concerning the fourth, namely, God, who is opposed to those sinning, both when he punishes and when he commands the opposite deeds: you are changed to be cruel toward me and in the hardness of your hand you are against me (Job 30:21). And concerning the fifth, deliver me, O my God, out of the hand of the sinner and out of the hand of the transgressor of the law and of the unjust (Ps 71:4); how very unpleasant is wisdom to the unlearned (Sir 6:21).

Therefore Augustine asks which of these should be understood by this verse. It is not about a man who has injured you, because of two things. First, because of what follows: lest perhaps the adversary deliver you to the judge, for how would he hand you over to Christ who will judge both together? Second, because if he dies, will he never have hope of forgiveness? Therefore it cannot be understood about a man. Nor about the devil: for God would not want this; by the fact that the first man agreed with him he fell into misery. Although certain people, according to Jerome, explain it about the devil, saying that we are in agreement with him when we keep the pact that we struck with him in baptism, as we said I renounce Satan. But this explanation is forced.

499. It is not about the flesh, nor about God, for he says: be in agreement: for although God is with every man, nevertheless, not every man is with God. Hence Augustine says that it is to be understood about God’s words and law: which law is opposed to us when we sin. Nevertheless, the explanation of Jerome and Chrysostom is more literal, who say be in agreement with your adversary, i.e., agree with the man who has hurt you or whom you have hurt, and do this quickly, delay not to be converted (Sir 5:8); on the way, i.e., in this life.

Afterwards he assigns the reason from the things unfitting to this, which are four. First: lest perhaps the adversary deliver you to the judge: if this is understood about the word of God, the literal sense is plain. The judge here is taken for Christ: the Father . . . has given all judgment to the Son (John 5:22); and, to testify that it is he who was appointed by God to be the judge of the living and of the dead (Acts 10:42). Hence, the words of God hand us over to Christ inasmuch as they accuse us of the sin which we have committed against the law; hence the word that I have spoken . . . will judge him in the last day (John 12:48).

But if it is understood as being about a man, then he delivers you over either for a reason or by chance, for discord is the reason that you would hand someone over to a judge and by this very sin you would become liable to the judge. And he says perhaps because if he dies and you remain in this life, the place of repentance will not be taken from you, since God is above all the reason you should love him; but if he were the adversary, reconciliation would happen more easily.

500. The second unfitting thing follows from and the judge. This minister, according to Augustine, is a good angel; bless the Lord, all you his angels . . . ministers (Ps 102:21). Nor is it doubtful that angels will come with Christ at the judgment and will be the agents of the things that are done there: when the Son of man will come (Matt 25:31). Chrysostom understands this as referring to a bad angel, as though it were to be under the power of the devil. But is the devil called a minister of God? It should be said that someone can be called minister of someone else in two ways: as to his deed, i.e., because he does the will of another, or as to his intent. And in this second way the devil is no minister of God, for he does not serve because of the justice of God, but because of his hatred of men whom he punishes. Hence minister is said only in the first way, the same as: I have given all the kingdoms of the land to Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 27:6).

The third unfitting thing is found at and you be cast into prison. Here the prison of hell is understood, about which is written: the devil will cast some of you into prison, that you may be tried (Rev 2:10). And it is called a prison by similitude because those who are there have their free will bound, by the fact that they are obstinate in evil. Nevertheless, if it were understood as referring to good angels it should be known that a good angel does punish sometimes. But according to Dionysius it never punishes the good but only the bad, like the one who struck the army of Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18).

501. The fourth unfitting thing is this: amen I say to you . . . the last farthing. A farthing is even less than a denarius which has two lesser coins below it, and it was called a ‘quadrans’ because it was the fourth part of one large denarius. Therefore the Lord means you will not go out from there until you pay the price and you satisfy for your least sins, even the venial ones. Hence comparison is made with a farthing because of its smallness. Or, according to Augustine, the metaphor can be taken also according to number, not only quantity. Hence it can signify sins that are committed from love of earthly things; and earth is the fourth element.

502. But why did he say you will not go out from there until: therefore, it is possible to get out. It should be said that the until sometimes designates a limited time, sometimes an unlimited one, as in, he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25). Afterward, then, will he cease to reign? Not at all. Hence what is said there is unlimited: and so also this you will not go out from there until, i.e., he will never get out, for he will never repay the last penny. And Hilary explains why: for no one is forgiven of sin except by charity: charity covers all sins (Prov 10:12). Therefore, whoever dies with discord dies without charity, and thus he will never be purged from sins. And note in this that they are punished in hell eternally not only for mortal sins but even for venial ones, (provided that they were not forgiven before when they were in charity). And this is you will not get out from there.

503. Because of this difficulty about the until, other explanations are suggested. Hence into prison, that is, the prison of these present tribulations: behold, the devil will cast some of you into prison, that you may be tried, and you will have tribulation ten days (Rev 2:10). Once God punishes someone in the present for sins he does not relax until he is totally purged. But Chrysostom says that the whole can be explained as the present life. Hence he says be in agreement as quickly as possible, since not only eternal punishment looms, but even temporal damages. Hence, lest perhaps the adversary deliver you to the judge, literally. And he says perhaps because it does not always happen this way, for although the Gospel promises are about eternal goods, nevertheless sometimes the Lord makes temporal promises and eternal penalties: and this is amen I say to you.

Against lust

5:27 You have heard that it was said to them of old: do not commit adultery. [n. 504]

5:28 But I say to you, that whoever will look on a woman to lust after her, has already committed adultery with her in his heart. [n. 506]

5:29 And if your right eye scandalize you, pluck it out and cast it from you. For it is expedient for you that one of your members would perish, rather than that your whole body would be cast into hell. [n. 508]

5:30 And if your right hand scandalize you, cut it off, and cast it from you: for it is expedient for you that one of your members would perish, rather than that your whole body would be cast into hell. [n. 508]

504. You have heard that it was said: ‘do not commit adultery.’ Above the Lord fulfilled the law as to the precept prohibiting homicide; now he fulfills it as to the precept prohibiting adultery. And concerning this he does three things: first, he lays down the precept; second, the fulfillment; third, he teaches how it could be observed. The second is at but I say to you, the third at if your right eye. And fittingly after the precept prohibiting homicide, the precept prohibiting adultery is discussed, because adultery holds second place after homicide. For homicide is against the life of man already existing; but adultery is against the life of a man to be generated: for it destroys certainty about children and as a result, their education.

‘Do not commit adultery.’ ‘Moechia’ is properly adultery. This precept is from Exodus and Deuteronomy (Exod 22; Deut 5).

505. And it should be known that since simple fornication is not prohibited in the precepts of the decalogue, but only adultery, some people believed that simple fornication was not a mortal sin, since it was not against the law if it was not in the precepts of the decalogue. First, it is said in Leviticus: if a man carnally lie with a woman (Lev 19:20). Therefore simple fornication is a venial sin; further, all iniquity is sin (1 John 5:17). But whoever commits simple fornication does iniquity to no one: not himself, for he fulfills his own will; not another; not God, for it is not directly against him like blasphemy and idolatry and that kind of thing. Therefore, it is not mortal.

506. It should be said that it must be absolutely certain among the faithful that every act of simple fornication is a mortal sin, as is basically any use of the genital organs outside of the marital use, for fornicators and adulterers God will judge (Heb 13:4); and he gave it separately because he will judge fornicators just as adulterers: take heed to keep yourself . . . from all fornication (Tob 4:13), and, there will be no prostitute among the daughters of Israel (Deut 22:17). Therefore it is clear by the authorities of the Old and New Testaments that it is a mortal sin. And the reason for this is that marriage is a natural thing, not only according to our faith, but even according to the gentiles, for it is natural that a man should be matrimonially joined not to any women indiscriminately, but to one particular woman. Nor does it matter what may be done by any multitude, as far as the intention of nature goes, but what is of natural law is perverted among those who lack reason. For the union of male and female is ordered to generation and education. In other animals the female alone suffices for education, and among such animals the father never involves himself in the education of the children; and thus there is no certainty about the children, and afterward he mingles indiscriminately with any female, as is seen among dogs. But among others we see that wherever the female does not suffice for the education of the children, the male and female remain together throughout the education of the children. Therefore it is clear that since the union is for the sake of the education, every union from which the due education does not follow is against nature. Therefore, since the child born needs much care from the father, it is necessary that a man have a particular woman: and this is marriage. But whether he may have several wives is another question. Fornication therefore will be against that education in the same way: therefore it is against nature and a mortal sin. But Moses spoke the most obvious notions to the Jews as a teacher to a primitive audience: the decalogue is the beginning of a law, and thus it only expresses those things that are most obvious. Hence some say that God himself spoke the decalogue, but he reserved all other things to be explained by others. Hence in this ‘do not commit adultery’ is understood every sin that there is by the use of those organs outside marriage. Likewise he sins against himself: whoever fornicates sins against his own body (1 Cor 6:18), because such an act should not be except for the generation of another. Likewise, in the law sins such as theft and many others were not punished by death: therefore this objection about Exodus does not hold. Therefore it is clear that fornication is mortal.

I say to you. Here the Lord brings the law to fulfillment. For the Pharisees and scribes understood ‘do not commit adultery’ only as to the act. But the Lord prohibits also the desire. But Augustine objects here that a precept of the decalogue is you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his house, nor his field, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant. Therefore the Lord did not fulfill it. And he answers that he understands you shall not covet to the point of carrying off; hence he mentions at the same time you shall not covet the wife or the slave-girl.

507. And note that he does not say whoever sees and covets, but whoever will look on a woman to lust after her. And it is explained in two ways. The first thus: whoever will look on a woman to lust after her, that is, so that he may covet her, as may be considered concomitance. And there are two kinds of concupiscence: one which is a propassion and the other which is a passion. A propassion is called an incomplete passion, as it were, when the movement remains in the sensible appetite alone, without the reason consenting. A passion is when reason consents, and then it is a mortal sin. And thus he says he has already committed adultery with her in his heart, for God is the searcher of hearts, and such a person does not refrain from the act except because of some obstacle to it.

Or the to lust after her, according to Augustine, conveys purpose, i.e., whoever will look on a woman to lust, i.e., for the purpose of lusting after her. But the rule is that whatever a man does for the purpose of mortal sin, is completely mortal, and whatever he does for a meritorious purpose is completely meritorious; as is clear in the case of someone who goes to the church, or who goes to steal: regardless of what is done at the same time, the whole is either meritorious or a sin. But there are two kinds of consent: one consents to the act, as when reason goes first, insomuch that one wills to commit adultery; the other consent is to the pleasure, as when someone excites in himself base sensual pleasures so that he might enjoy them, although he does not consent to the act.

The first way is mortal, when someone looks on a woman for the purpose of sensual pleasure, and thus he consents. He has already committed adultery in his heart, before God: I made a covenant with my eyes that I would not . . . think on a virgin (Job 31:1); gaze not upon a maiden, lest her beauty be a stumbling block to you (Sir 9:5). Chrysostom says also that women who adorn themselves in order to be lusted after sin mortally: if someone opens a pit or digs a pit and does not cover it, and an ox or ass should fall in, the owner of the pit shall pay the price (Exod 21:33). And if no one lusts after her, it must be said that she sins mortally, like a person who prepares poison, even if it were not consumed by the one it was intended for, still, the person preparing it sins mortally because he did what he could to kill him.

508. And if your right eye. Here the Lord shows how this precept can be more easily observed, namely by avoiding the occasions of sin. But four things are represented by the eyes and by the hands. The first is the physical eye and hand, and it may be understood thus: cut it off physically. According to Chrysostom, this reading cannot stand, for there is no member that does not scandalize: for I know that there does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh, that which is good (Rom 7:18). Hence all members would have to be cut off: and therefore this is not the meaning of the verse. Or another reading. For the body is said to be killed in two ways: as to the life of nature and as to the life of guilt: that the body of sin may be destroyed, to the end that we may serve sin no longer (Rom 6:6), and so cut away sin. But then the left eye would not be innocent: therefore this is not the meaning.

509. Therefore it should be said that by the eye is sometimes meant a neighbor who has come to help: for the role of the eye is to direct your path. Hence your counselor in ordinary things is your left eye, and in divine things it is your right eye. The role of the hand is to help you. Hence the neighbor who manages temporal affairs is your left hand; the one who manages spiritual matters is your right: I was an eye to the blind, and a foot to the lame (Job 29:15). Therefore according to this reading, the eye and hand scandalizing can be understood in two ways, as when a certain counselor in everyday or divine matters scandalizes you. He makes no mention of the left eye because if the right eye must be cut off, the left eye must be even more. Or another way. The Lord wills that not only in you but also in your family you preserve purity. Hence if someone unclean lives with you, cut him off: he who works pride will not dwell in the midst of my house (Ps 101:7).

Or we can understand the eye or the hand of man’s inner self: for which cause we do not faint, but though our outward man is corrupted, yet the inward man is renewed day by day (2 Cor 4:16), for as the exterior is, so is the interior: that the eyes of your heart enlightened (Eph 1:18). But it is said there that a hand is a power of moving, an eye is an intellective power. And according to this it can be explained in two ways. The first like this: by the fact that the eye which is in the intellective part, which has free will, is also in the right, the exterior is in the left, the Lord does not say that you should cut off the left because it is not in the power of free will that the external members do not move themselves, but that the internal members do not move themselves badly and look about wickedly. Therefore he says if your right eye scandalizes you by wicked thinking, remove this understanding; likewise, if there is a bad will, remove it.

510. Or another way, the eye represents good intentions, the hand a good will. If scandal or an occasion of lust results from these things, remove them; just as if someone has a good will when visiting poor women, if the occasion of lust follows from it, pluck it out.

Fourth, by the eye can be signified the contemplative life, and by the hand, the active life. Sometimes these things scandalize because sometimes error is met with in extreme contemplation. Likewise, someone, because he is not an apostle, may not fill the work of contemplation, but degenerate into laziness: the enemies have seen her and have mocked at her sabbaths (Lam 1:7). Therefore, pluck it out, and go to the practice of work. Or sometimes in the active life someone becomes restless and falls into occasions of sin: wherefore, he should cross over into the other state.

511. Therefore the first way is to be excluded; the second, about one’s neighbor, the third, about the interior man, and the fourth, about the active and contemplative life, make an explanation of for it is expedient for you that one of your members would perish; and the fifth concerns good consideration and good action.

Against divorce

5:31 It has been said: whoever will put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce. [n. 512]

5:32 But I say to you, that whoever will put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, makes her commit adultery: and he who will marry her who is put away, commits adultery. [n. 515]

512. It has been said: ‘whoever will put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.’ After the Lord has fulfilled the prohibitive precepts of the law, now he fulfills the permissive precepts of the law.

And this part is divided into two parts:

first, he fulfills the law as to the permissive precepts which pertain to God;

second, as to the precepts that pertain to one’s neighbor, at you have heard that it is said: ‘an eye for an eye’ (Matt 5:38).

The first is in two parts: first, he fulfills the permissive precept concerning the bill of divorce;

second, concerning swearing, at you have heard it said to them of old: ‘you shall not forswear yourself’ (Matt 5:33).

513. As to the first he does two things:

first, he sets down the words of the law;

second, their fulfillment: but I say to you, that whoever will put away his wife.

514. Therefore he says it has been said: (Deut 24:1). A question. If ‘whoever will put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce’: this is commanded. But to put away one’s wife is a permission: for Moses permitted, he did not command.

But there are many kinds of permission, namely: a concession, when permitted things are conceded, as when a monk is allowed to leave the abbey to visit his father;

a dispensation, when things that are not permitted become permitted by dispensation, as when it is permitted dispensatively for a monk to eat meat when he is with others;

an indulgence, when something permissible, whose opposite is better, is allowed, like the Apostle’s permission for second marriages, even though the continence of the widowed is a better thing: and according to this you resolve what the Gloss says here, namely that the apostles commanded second marriages, i.e., they allowed them by way of indulgence, or it was commanded unless you were willing to remain continent: otherwise it would not oblige like a precept.

Then there is a forbearance, as when God permits certain evils to happen, although he always draws some good out of them; and a tolerance, when some evil is tolerated lest something worse happen, as here.

‘Whoever will put away his wife’. Is the indissolubility of marriage not from natural law? But it is in the law of Moses by dispensation that here ‘let him give her a bill of divorce’ in which the reasons for the divorce are recorded, according to Josephus. Or, according to Augustine: it was written down like this so that there would be an intervening delay, and on the advice of the scribes dissuading him, the man might cease his divorce proceedings. But according to Jerome on this subject, the reason for permitting the divorce of one’s wife was to avoid uxoricide.

515. But was the divorced wife allowed to marry? But I say to you . . . makes her commit adultery. But it is a question. Was it not permitted for a husband to put away his wife on account of fornication? And it seems that evil should not be rendered for evil. It must be said that the Lord conceded divorcing one’s wife for fornication as a penalty to the one who broke faith. But is he bound to this by the precept? It must be said that putting away one’s fornicating wife was introduced for the correction of the wife’s crime. But can someone put her away by his own judgment? He who will marry her who is put away, commits adultery, for the man is intruding on an existing marriage.

Against oaths

5:33 You have heard it said to them of old: you shall not forswear yourself: but you shall perform your oaths to the Lord. [n. 516]

5:34 But I say to you not to swear at all, neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God: [n. 518]

5:35 nor by the earth, for it is his footstool: nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king: [n. 520]

5:36 neither shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. [n. 522]

5:37 But let your speech be yes, yes: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil. [n. 523]

516. You have heard it said to them of old: ‘you shall not forswear yourself.’ Above the Lord gave the fulfillment of one permissive precept, namely, about the bill of divorce. Here he fulfills another permissive precept, namely, about swearing.

And concerning this he does three things:

first, he sets down the words of the law;

second, he gives their fulfillment;

third, he answers a question.

The second is at but I say to you;

the third, at but let your speech be.

517. But it must be considered that there are two things contained in the words of the law, one of which was simply prohibitive, the other permissive. The prohibitive one: perjury, and this is you have heard, at, you shall not swear falsely (Lev 19:12), and almost the same meaning at: you shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain (Exod 20:7). The permissive one: ‘perform your oaths to the Lord’, that is when it happens that you swear, you will swear not by creatures but by God, you shall fear the Lord your God, and shall serve him only and you shall swear by his name (Deut 6:13). And according to this it seems that this sacrament, namely, to swear by God, is not a sin, but rather the law permitted it because Jews were prone to idolatry, not as if it were licit, but that the worse thing might be avoided, namely, idolatry.

But it is clear that it is in itself a good thing to show reverence to God; to swear by God is to show reverence to God. And this is clear because in the Gloss it is said each one, and, for men swear by one greater than themselves (Heb 6:16): therefore, to swear by God is a good thing in itself. Furthermore, to swear by God is to invoke God as witness; but this is good in itself: therefore to swear by God is good in itself.

518. And it should be known that swearing in itself is not something ordered, but on the contrary carries disorder in itself. Swearing by God is nothing other than invoking God as witness to human speech. But this can happen two ways. For either divine testimony is brought in to confirm human speech alone, and this is not evil; or else divine judgment is demanded, as though to say: if it is not so, may he be damned by God. But among the deeds of men, nothing is so fragile as a word, if any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man (Jas 3:2). Hence to invoke God as witness in something in which man is so fragile, is to condemn the judgment of God, a man who swears much will be filled with iniquity (Sir 23:12).

But the Lord fulfills this accordingly. Hence but I say to you not to swear at all. Therefore swearing in itself is illicit. Therefore since judges compel people to swear in court, it seems that they act against a precept; and this is the opinion of certain heretics who say that swearing is permitted to no one. And Jerome answers that the Lord here prohibits swearing by creatures, and this for the sake of the Jews who were prone to idolatry: hence he does not prohibit swearing simply. But this does not seem a good explanation, for then the Lord would add nothing to the words of the law which says ‘perform your oaths to the Lord.’ And therefore it should be said, according to Augustine, that the Lord prohibits swearing by God and by creatures.

519. But then there remains a twofold question. First, that our Lord would have destroyed the law which says render your vows to the Lord; second, because according to this it seems that swearing is illicit. And Augustine answers that just as the bill of divorce was not intended by the law, but permitted on account of the cruelty of the Jews, and the Lord fulfilled it; because in no way did he will that the law be given the same way here, he commanded that they not forswear, but if they swore they should swear not by creatures but by God. But the Lord fulfills it when he says not to swear. And just as no one who keeps silence can lie, so also someone who never swears is most removed from perjury.

To the argument that swearing is illicit, it should be said, according to Augustine, that it is the same Holy Spirit who is spoken of in the holy Scriptures and who worked among the holy men. Hence whatever may be the understanding of the Scriptures is clear from the words of the holy men. Paul was moved by the Holy Spirit, and nevertheless he swore twice, for both in an oath of simple testimony: for God is my witness (Rom 1:9); and in an oath of imprecation, which is when someone pledges his salvation or his soul to God, but I call God to witness upon my soul (1 Cor 1:9). And if it is said that this is not an oath, this is ridiculous, for it is the same thing to swear by God and to swear upon my soul: I die daily, I protest by your glory, brethren (1 Cor 15:31); and in Greek, the by is understood as may I swear. Therefore if Paul swore it seems that the Lord did not intend to prohibit swearing, but rather carelessness in swearing. And it shows that swearing is not in itself to be sought, but rather avoided except when necessary: and thus Augustine says that Paul never swore except in writing because it should not be done except with great caution and deliberation and out of necessity unless required for the benefit of others.

520. But it could be said that it is evil to swear by God, but not to swear by something less than God. And the Lord excludes this, hence neither by heaven. To swear by creatures can be either with idolatry or without idolatry. For if judgment is attributed to these things, namely by demanding judgment from created things, then that is idolatry, as with the ancients who said the sky was God. In another way it can be without sin or idolatry in two ways. First, inasmuch as a created thing is pledged to God by calling for judgment on it, as when men swear by their heads. Second, inasmuch as in any created thing there appears some evidence of divine majesty, as if it is sworn by the sky, his strength and power are manifest in the sky. Hence here he sets down more excellent created things by which someone could swear.

And this excellence is manifest in three things, namely, the two elements: heaven and earth, under which are contained all other things as middles between extremes. And as to the fact that he says neither by heaven: heaven is my throne and earth my footstool (Isa 66:1). Chrysostom: he does not say neither by heaven because it is some kind of large body, or nor by the earth which is mother of all things, but he shows their excellence by their relationship to God.

521. But does God have members and a position and that kind of thing? Hence this is explained in two ways. First, literally. For seat is said of that thing where someone rests, and he rests wherever he perfectly stands. For thus among corporeal created things the heaven participates more greatly in divine goodness and the earth less; thus heaven is called the seat, earth the footstool. Likewise men are accustomed to sitting at judgment. And heaven is said because the Lord sometimes judges by those things that come from heaven, by these he judges people (Job 36:31), namely by lightning and that sort of thing.

But mystically, by heaven holy men are understood, whose conversation is in heaven: but our conversation is in heaven (Phil 3:20). Through these God judges: the spiritual man judges all things (2 Cor 2:15). Earth represents sinners, because of their earthly affections, who mind earthly things (Phil 3:19); footstool, because if they do not fulfill the law that they are under, they will be punished.

522. For man’s way of life, he sets the city, and among the other cities Jerusalem is preeminent because God is worshipped there; and this is nor by Jerusalem: glorious things are said of you, O city of God (Ps 87:3), and, Jerusalem, which is built as a city (Ps 122:3).

And by members of the body. But because it could be said that we should not swear by the greater members, but by the lesser ones, for this reason he says nor by your head. For anyone can do what he wishes with what is his own; but man does not have power over his own head as to every least thing; therefore, he should not swear by it. And this is for you cannot make one hair white or black, according to nature, that is: no one can add to his stature one cubit (Matt 6:72).

523. But it may be said, how then will we speak? He answers and first satisfies the question, second, gives the reason. Therefore he says let your speech be. And this can be explained in three ways. The first in this way. If someone should ask, is this so? Let your speech be yes, yes; no, no. It is or it is not. Second, that the mouth not say something and the heart feel something else and the actions show something else again: who speak peace with their neighbors: but evils are in their hearts (Ps 28:3). The third is like this, and it is more literal. Let your speech be yes, yes: if a thing is, it is; if it is not, it is not; as though he were saying: you shall say one thing simply. For this is the definition of the true: to be what is and not to be what is not. And this is Hilary’s explanation, Christ Jesus . . . was not: it is and it is not. But it is, was in him (2 Cor 1:19).

524. He does not say it is evil, but it is of evil, not from your own but from another, since to swear is of the body, although nevertheless it may be expedient that the other might believe; and this is how the Apostle swore. Or, according to Chrysostom, and that which is over and above these, by this it is clear that in the old law he prohibited one oath, namely, perjury, but he allowed another, namely, swearing out of necessity. He removes the third oath, namely, a superstitious one, which is when a created thing is shown reverence that is owed to the creator.

Against revenge

5:38 You have heard that it was said: an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. [n. 525]

5:39 But I say to you not to resist evil: but if one strike you on your right cheek, turn to him also the other. [n. 527]

5:40 And if a man will contend with you in judgment, and take away your coat, let go your cloak to him also. [n. 532]

5:41 And whoever will force you one mile, go with him the other two, [n. 534]

5:42 give to him who asks of you and from him who would borrow of you turn not away. [n. 535]

525. You have heard that it was said: ‘an eye for an eye.’ Above, the Lord fulfilled the law as to the permissive precepts that pertain to God; now, he does it as to those that pertain to our neighbor. And this in two respects: as to the act, and as to the emotion. The second is found at, ‘you shall love your neighbor’ (Matt 5:43).

Concerning the first he does two things:

first, he quotes the words of the law,

second, he fulfills it.

526. Therefore he says, you have heard that it was said, that you ought to require ‘an eye for an eye’ (Ex 21:24: Deut 19:21). But in these words of the law different things were understood by the lawgiver than by the Jews, for the intention of the lawgiver was to establish a mode of judging in justice for the judges, so that they could impose a predetermined penalty. The Jews understood it as each one taking his own retribution for the injuries he had suffered, which was against the law: seek not revenge (Lev 19:18).

Therefore the Lord gives the fulfillment as to the wrong understanding. Hence, but I say to you.

And concerning this he does two things. For he fulfills it in two ways:

first, as to the fact that retribution is not to be sought;

second, that one should do good to anyone inflicting an injury, at give to him who asks of you.

Concerning this he does two things:

first, he gives the fulfillment in general,

second, in the particular, at but if one strike you.

527. As to the surface meaning of the letter, it seems to be a bad law. And vice versa. But according to Augustine, the Lord did not destroy, but fulfilled. For the intention of the law was to draw men away from extreme and unregulated revenge. But God completely prohibits revenge. Hence if the law had said ‘do not seek revenge beyond your due,’ and the Lord says: ‘do not seek it at all,’ he would be fulfilling the words of the law.

And here, according to Augustine, five degrees should be considered: one, the man who inflicted an injury, and this is the greatest degree of wickedness; second, the man who retaliates with an equal injury, and this is less of iniquity than the first; the third, someone who strikes back but less than he suffered; fourth, someone who repays no penalty; fifth, someone who not only does not repay, but also does not hinder even if another evil is inflicted on him. And this is what the Lord teaches: hence but I say to you not to resist evil. And it is understood to be about an evil, not of guilt, but of penalty or injury: do not revenge yourselves (Rom 12:19); and this fits well enough with what has been said.

528. But someone could say: I wish to be vindicated, not in order to delight in revenge, but so that I may not be offended again; but the Lord also excludes this: do not resist evil.

529. But it should be seen how these sentences of the Lord may be understood. For two kinds of objections are made, according to two errors. One, as Augustine says in his letter against Marcellinus, is the error of the gentiles, who argued that without retribution no state could be preserved. It is how a stand is made against enemies, and thieves are punished: which measures must be done thoroughly, or the state would perish. Therefore, the Gospel law destroys human society: therefore it should be obliterated. On the other hand, heretics say that the Gospels support revenge and do not wish to take away those things that pertain to society by abolishing it. Hence it should be said that those proceed from a false understanding. For someone can resist evil in two ways: out of love for a public good or for a private one. But the Lord did not intend to prohibit us from resisting evil for the good of the community, but rather that no one should burn with revenge for his own private good. For nothing preserves the society of men more than that a man not have the power of doing evil for his own private ends.

But again it seems that the Lord does not intend to prohibit this; for the natural inclination of anything is to resist evil corrupting its good; therefore this precept cannot be kept. But it should be said that the natural inclination is that everything repel its own harm. And similarly the natural inclination is that everything expose itself to its own detriment so as to avoid damage to the community, as a hand exposes itself to danger for the sake of the body, and any part for the sake of its whole. Hence it is natural that a man endure an evil for the good of the nation, and political virtue, like fortitude and such, pertains to this.

530. But Augustine says that let him not resist should be understood according to the preparation of the soul: for a man should be prepared to endure or undergo all evils for the benefit of his neighbor, and he gives an example. For if someone were taking care of a deranged man who struck him or did something like that, the first man, if he had good will toward the other, would be prepared to endure even other evils for his welfare: and this you must do for the benefit of the Church.

And it should be noted that what the Lord says is in some cases a precept, and in some cases, a counsel. It is a precept to someone who would abandon what he is bound to by fear of some temporal inconvenience; as a prelate who cares for a flock should be prepared in his soul to endure any losses before he will abandon what he is bound to. It is a counsel, when it does not involve overlooking what one is bound to, as when someone endures many injuries from his parents for the sake of entering religious life, the counsel is that he not let go of what is better.

531. Accordingly, what the Lord said he demonstrates in general and in particular: but if one strike you. Three different kinds of harm can be inflicted on someone: by wounding his body, by taking his things, or by forcibly restricting his action. And he gives an example of these three.

Therefore he says, but if one strike you on your right cheek, turn to him also the other: he will give his cheek to him who strikes him (Lam 3:30); I have given my body to the strikers and my cheeks to those who plucked them (Isa 50:6). How those things should be understood can be seen from the acts of holy men. For the Lord who began to do and to teach this did not fulfill it: if I have spoken evil, give testimony of it; but if not, why do you strike me? (John 18:23); and the Apostle: God will strike you, you whited wall (Acts 23:3). And from this Augustine concludes that we know from the acts of holy men how the Scriptures are to be understood. Hence he says this is to be understood in the preparation of the soul, and explain this as above.

532. Mystically, however, it should be known that the man who strikes you in the face insults you in your sight: if a man is lifted up, if a man strike you on the face (2 Cor 11:20). The right cheek has to do with spiritual things, the left one with temporal things. Therefore it means that if you endure an injury in spiritual things, much more should you in temporal matters; against which prelates act who endure the loss of their churches but not of their relatives.

And if a man will contend with you in judgment. This can happen in two ways: someone may contend in order to receive his own things, and then it is no great thing if you yield; but if it is to take away your things, this belongs to perfection if you yield. And this is: and take away your coat, that is, any temporal thing, let go your cloak to him also, that is, any other thing. And this is also in the preparation of the soul, for if someone speaks some calumny against you, nevertheless, do not let go of the charity you have for him: already indeed there is plainly a fault among you, that you have lawsuits with one another (1 Cor 6:7).

533. This judgment is to be avoided for two reasons. One is that if a cleric is subjected to secular judgment it diminishes his dignity. The other reason is that although he does not intend any calumny, nevertheless if he sees the cause of his contention calumniated, an occasion for doing the same thing will be given to him; and thus it is dangerous to contend in judgment.

Likewise to seek redress in court can happen in two ways: licitly, and illicitly; it is illicit to go to court with unbelievers. Also, one may not go to court contentiously: for contention is an assault against the truth with the boldness of shouting; it is an honor for a man to separate himself from quarrels (Prov 20:3). On the other hand, a licit claim can happen two ways: when it is about the affairs of the poor or of the Church; hence if the bishop does not go to court over these, he sins. Another case is when someone who steals becomes even more insolent and more shameless unless he is resisted, charity is that in this case his soul should be delivered from death; but when it is a private matter and no correction is hoped for, then he is not to be condemned. Nevertheless, all these things are to be understood as referring to the preparation of the soul.

534. And whoever will force you one mile. Force is properly to enslave someone in some servile work without justice. Go . . . the other two, that is, miles: you suffer it if anyone brings you into bondage (2 Cor 11:20).

And it should be noted that the Lord proceeded in a certain order. First he said that evil was not to be resisted; afterward that a man should be prepared not only to not resist, but to endure an equal penalty, but more since he ascends to the double.

535. Give to him who asks of you. Here he says that we should do good to evildoers in two ways: by the mode of simple giving and of loaning. As to the first, he says who asks: if you have much, give abundantly (Tob 4:9); if I have denied to the poor what they desired (Job 31:16). But it is objected that the poor cannot do this. Likewise, if the rich were always giving, nothing would remain to them. And Augustine resolves this two ways. The first, thus, because you should not give everything that someone asks, for not something indecent or unjust or irrational or something that you need more; but when someone asks rightly, you should give: and this is a precept if you are bound, a counsel if you are not bound. Jerome, though, says that it is understood as referring to a spiritual good because that can be harmful to no one.

536. From him who would: receive a loan. Here two things: for anyone doing a service to another, even if he simply gives him something, expects retribution: who has mercy on the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him (Prov 19:17); cast your bread on running waters, for . . . you will find it again (Eccl 11:1). Or another way, who would receive something that he would return, turn not away. And it could seem to someone that God did not recompense the property that he hoped for from a man, and thus he might be moved to give rather than loan, or he would receive it back from God. But the Lord says that he will also receive it back from God. Or he says turn not away because sometimes they fear being cheated and so they refuse to make a loan: many have refused to lend, not out of wickedness, but they were afraid to be defrauded without cause (Sir 29:10) and further, lose your money for your brother (Sir 29:13). And it should be noted that this can be a precept and a counsel according to different situations: which is clear from what has been said.

Love of enemies

5:43 You have heard it said: you shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy. [n. 537]

5:44 However, I say to you, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, pray for those who persecute and calumniate you; [n. 540]

5:45 that you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who makes his sun to rise upon the good and the bad and rains upon the just and the unjust. [n. 549]

5:46 For if you love those who love you, what reward will you have? Do not even the publicans do this? [n. 552]

5:47 And if you salute your brethren only, what more do you do? Do not the heathens also do this? [n. 552]

5:48 Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect. [n. 553]

537. You have heard it said: ‘you shall love your neighbor.’ Above, the Lord gave the fulfillment of the law as to the permissive act, and here as to the emotion of hatred, according to what was seen. And this is the last fulfillment, and fittingly enough he ends the fulfillment with love, for love is the fullness of the law (Rom 13:10).

Concerning this he does two things:

first, he sets down those things that are of the law;

second, he gives their fulfillment, at but I say to you.

In these words he touches on two things, namely, love and hate.

538. Concerning the first it should be considered that some people understood the neighbor to be said only of household members and relatives. And according to the truth of the matter every man is called neighbor and even the angels: for it is said in Luke that the one who had mercy on the Samaritan is called his neighbor (Luke 10:36–37). We can take from this that the one is called ‘neighbor’ from whom we receive mercy: such as the angels; or to whom we owe mercy: such as a man. This precept is from Leviticus (Lev 19:18).

And the Lord wanted to use this name ‘neighbor’ because by it he makes us understand the definition of love. For all friendship is based on some likeness or closeness: every beast loves its like (Sir 13:19). But there is a certain natural similarity according as all men share in one species. Hence just as it is natural that every animal loves its like, so also it is natural that every man love his like. Another likeness is political, for somone must love another as he is his fellow countryman: and this is political friendship. But there is also the similitude of grace, and this is broader because it is extended to all who are ordered to beatitude, namely, men and angels: and this is the precept of charity that is based on that union. Therefore, his saying ‘love your neighbor’ is not to be understood only of those who share the same blood ties or familiarity, but the ordering to beatitude.

539. ‘And hate your enemy.’ These words are written nowhere in the law. But they can be taken from certain words of Exodus, where God said that they should not enter into a covenant with their enemies (Exod 23:32); and in Deuteronomy, he commands that they destroy them by complete extermination (Deut 7:2). Certain men have taken from this that enemies should be hated: and because of this understanding he says ‘and hate.’

But heretics say the opposite. The law says ‘hate’; but all hatred is a sin; therefore the law commands sin. Augustine answers: he commands us to love our enemies. I argue this because he himself did good to the good and to the bad; therefore, inasmuch as we should imitate God in this, we should love our enemies. But God does hate some: detractors, hateful to God (Rom 1:30). And nevertheless God loves all things: for you love all things (Wis 11:25). Hence it should be said that God loves nature, but he hates fault; and likewise, this is what the law wants.

540. Hence the Lord gives the fulfillment as to the wrong understanding of the scribes and Pharisees, who twisted the meaning to hatred simply speaking, which in any case was against the law: do not hate your brother (Lev 19:17). But they understood ‘brother’ to mean the Jews, although all men were created by God and ordered to one beatitude. Therefore the Lord gives this fulfillment: however, I say to you. And concerning this he does three things: first, he gives the fulfillment, second, the argument proving it, and third, he concludes with the chief thing intended. The second is at that you may be the children of your Father; the third, at be you therefore perfect. But he fulfills it as to three things, namely as to the affection of the heart, the duty of deeds of service, and of the mouth in prayer. The second is at do good; the third, at pray for those who persecute you.

Therefore he says love your enemies. But this seems to be unfitting. For it is clear that no thing can take away the inclination of nature; but this is the natural inclination, namely to hate one’s enemy. Hence everything is opposed to its contrary, as sheep flee the wolf, also among things lacking thought, for fire pursues water. Why then does the Lord say love your enemies?

541. But it should be known that as Chrysostom says, both love and hatred are twofold, namely of the flesh and of the reason. The Lord did not give this precept for the flesh, but for the reason. Thus whenever you feel the emotion of hatred arise in you and your reason restrains it so that you do not do any harm, then the hatred is only of the flesh.

But should we also love our enemies according to our reason? It should be said, according to Augustine, that we should, as to nature but not as to fault. Hence your adversary is to be loved in what he shares with you, as also appears among natural things; for white is opposed to black as it is unlike: as black, not as a color. Hence we should destroy hatred, i.e., the fact that he is an enemy should displease us, and we should destroy this in him.

542. But again there is a question: are not all bound to this? It seems not, for Augustine in the Enchiridion says that to love an enemy is perfection; and it is not of such a multitude as is believed to be heard in prayer when it says, and forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors (Matt 6:12). Therefore God forgave the debts of someone who does not love his enemy. But a debt is forgiven of no one unless he exists in charity; therefore to love an enemy is not of necessity for salvation.

But it should be known, as in the same place Augustine says, that we can speak two ways about this enemy: in one way before he seeks forgiveness, in another way after he seeks it. But after he seeks forgiveness he is no longer an enemy, but is to be considered a friend. And the Lord only forgives those who seek forgiveness: therefore he does not command that you forgive anyone except the one seeking forgiveness: therefore if he does not seek it, he will remain in your hatred.

543. It should be said that to love an enemy who does not seek forgiveness is in one way a precept and in another way a counsel. For all friendship is founded on some union. But there is a certain union between two people that is common and a certain union that is special. The special one is with someone from whom I have received many goods and with whom I always have familiarity and so on. The general one is inasmuch as we are fellow citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem; and according to this love it is not necessary that I bear special affection toward any of this multitude, when I must will all to be like myself and all men to be saved. And according to this we are not bound to love an enemy with special affection, but we are bound to not exclude him from our common love. Hence it would be against this precept if I desired all men to be saved except my enemy. But what I bear him of special love, this is of perfection and counsel. And Augustine says this: it is enough not to hate, i.e., so that you do not exclude general love.

544. And it should be known that to love someone is to will him good. But there are two kinds of good: eternal life, and charity intends this, because I am bound to love my neighbor as myself for eternal life; the other is temporal, and in this I am not bound to love my neighbor except insofar as these things lead to eternal life. Hence while preserving charity I can wish some temporal evil on my neighbor to the extent that it would give him the occasion of doing good and attaining eternal life. Hence Gregory says in his Morals that the sign that you do not love your neighbor is when you rejoice in his ruin; but I can rejoice in his temporal ruin to the extent that it is ordered to his good or that of others or of the multitude.

545. But because the proof of love is the showing of deeds, and it is said, let us not love in word . . . but in deed (1 John 3:18), for this reason the Lord supplies do good to those who hate you: if your enemy is hungry, give him to eat (Prov 25:21); if you see the donkey of him who hates you lying beneath his burden . . . lift him up with him (Exod 23:5). And this in certain cases is a precept, in others a counsel. It is a precept in the case in which you are bound to every man, even an enemy, namely, extreme necessity. But it is a counsel if you were giving alms, and I do not mean generally, for you should not exclude your enemy from those, but if you were making a particular donation and you did not exclude your enemy from it, this would be the counsel, and of perfection.

Pray for those who persecute and calumniate you. For someone might say: we cannot do good to others because we are poor; therefore he says, pray for those who persecute. They are called persecutors who persecute openly; calumniators are those who harm by deceits and going behind one’s back: my people went down into Egypt . . . and the Assyrian oppressed them with no cause (Isa 52:4). We have an example, for the Lord prayed for those who crucified him (Luke 23:24), as did Stephen (Acts 7:59). And this is a precept inasmuch as someone should not be excluded from the shared prayers of the Church; but it is a counsel if some particular prayer be offered for him, because one is not bound to do this even when praying for all the living.

546. But there are more serious questions, for we find many prophets praying against their enemies: may his children be fatherless (Ps 109:9); let me see your revenge on them (Jer 11:20); and many such verses are found. And it should be said that those words are not said with vengeful affection, but in the spirit of prophecy, not the emotion of someone wishing but the spirit of someone foretelling: hence let me see your revenge, i.e., I will see; or it should be said that saints will rejoice when they see the revenge (Ps 58:10). Thus the saints who are perfect in God’s justice wish the divine justice to be fulfilled.

547. Another question is what is said: if someone knows his brother does a sin that is not to death, let him ask . . . there is a sin unto death. For that I say not that any man ask (1 John 5:16:). Therefore among our brothers there are sins unto death: therefore if we should not pray for them, even less should we pray for our persecutors. And Augustine resolves this, because not every mortal sin is said to be ‘to death’, but only the sin against the Holy Spirit, which is properly final impenitence. And this suffices for now, because it will be dealt with in chapter twelve. Nor should it be believed that there is any sin that cannot be forgiven, for none was so great as that of Cain: my iniquity is greater than that (Gen 4:13). But just as God for certain preceding sins withdraws grace, because of which men fall into sin, hence they are also called hard-hearted or blinded: God gave them up to the desires of their hearts, unto uncleanness (Rom 1:24); so on account of the savagery of certain sins God does not give the grace of repentance, and this sin is when a man knows the good and pursues evil. Hence it is not called a sin unto death if people do not repent, but because it is so great in itself that they do not deserve that grace be offered. Hence because it is a hard thing to repent of, and it happens with difficulty, thus it is called a sin unto death; and because prayer is not made for sinners except for their conversion, these prayers are thus in vain for such people. Hence when the Lord said, Father forgive them for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34), he was not praying for all his persecutors, but for those who were predestined; and he knew who they were who were due to be converted. But because we do not know the predestined or who will be in sin at death, therefore we must pray for all.

The third question, which comes from the Gloss, is that it seems that it is not fitting to pray for persecutors because it is said he has revenged the blood of his servants (Rev 19:2); therefore we too must seek revenge. And this is resolved in two ways by Augustine. One solution is that when it is said revenged the blood, it is understood two ways: concerning men or concerning the wicked king. For one way someone is said to be vindicated is when the wrongdoing of the one whose wrongdoing offended you is destroyed, and this is the best revenge; and this is how Stephen was vindicated regarding Paul. In another way, when a penalty is inflicted, not because they would seek revenge, but from zeal for justice. Or revenge is not to be understood as though they were desiring revenge, but they are said to cry out in that the unjust death itself seeks retribution from God, as is said: the blood of your brother Abel cries out to me (Gen 4:10).

548. Accordingly, the Lord sets down the reasons proving it, and there are two: one from divine example, the other from the end.

549. As to the first he says, that you may be the children of your Father. But this seems to be saying nothing: for man becomes a child of God by grace; therefore it is not by works. But the Lord seems to imply that man should act well so that he acquires grace. But it must be known that this sonship is not natural, rather it is a likeness: for whom he preknew, he also predestined to be conformable to the image of his Son (Rom 8:29). Hence the more someone grows in divine likeness, the more he grows in divine filiation. The beginning of divine likeness is from faith. But no one believes unless he wants to: hence that is where our free will operates: he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to those who believe in his name (John 1:12). But this likeness grows by charity, growing larger by works, but most of all when someone attains glory: behold how they are numbered among the children of God (Wis 5:5); when he will appear we will be like to him, for we will see him as he is (1 John 3:2). So that you may be the children, therefore, in hope, by imitation in works; but in reality, by glory in eternal life.

550. Who is in heaven, because he presides from heaven, over physical things and spiritual ones.

551. Who makes his sun to rise. This can be understood literally about the material sun and rain. And note two things according to this: that if he gives the good things that he created, why will you not give, who dispense upon the good, i.e., your friends, and the bad, i.e., your enemies. And he says upon the good and the bad, because sometimes he gives to the good and sometimes to the evil: for he grants things to the benefit of the good because they are neither exalted in prosperity nor dejected in adversity; but it is to the detriment of the evil.

Another thing: note that temporal goods are not to be grasped at nor are temporal evils to be feared: from the fact that through good things sometimes evils are given, and through evils, many times goods are given.

Or who makes his sun can be explained of the spiritual sun and rain. But it is objected, the sun of understanding has not risen upon us (Wis 5:6), and in Isaiah, I will command the clouds to rain no rain upon it (Isa 5:6). But it should be said that to the good and the bad he gives these things sufficiently, but efficaciously, only to the good, as the teaching of Christ is efficacious to the good, but not to the wicked. Or by these two things baptism may be understood, and in the sun, the ardor of the Holy Spirit; in the rain, water.

552. For if you. Here is set down the second reason. He had said twice love your enemies, and do good; and these things are not meritorious unless by charity. Hence, for if you love. Supply this reason: no love is meritorious except by charity which is the love by which someone is loved on account of God; therefore, God is to be loved chiefly, and all men for the sake of God. Do not even the publicans: they were called publicans who were in charge of the public taxes, and they are said to have been instituted by the Roman consul Publius, and they were considered mere usurers because of the cheating they did: a merchant is hardly free from negligence (Sir 26:28).

Hence and if you salute your brethren only . . . do not the heathens also do this, for the gentiles are without charity; for heathens is Greek, and means ‘peoples’ in Latin.

553. Accordingly the Lord concludes everything he has said in this chapter: be you therefore perfect as also your heavenly Father is perfect: walk before me and be perfect (Gen 17:1); leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on to things more perfect (Heb 6:1). But the question is whether this is a precept or a counsel: if a precept, then all are bound to perfection; if a counsel, since all men are sons, all ought to imitate their Father.

554. But it should be said that just as nature is distinct, perfection is threefold, namely simple perfection, perfection according to nature, and perfection according to time. In the first way, only God is perfect. Perfection according to nature is when someone has those things that his nature requires; according to time, as a child is said to be perfect. Therefore when speaking of perfect love, similarly God is loved perfectly when he is loved as much as he should be loved; and only God can love this way: for no creature can love as much as God should be loved. For he is loved according to his goodness, which is infinite; and so it must be said that the as also conveys a likeness by imitation.

555. But there is another perfection of love possible to a creature, namely that it loves God according to its totality. And there are three degrees of this perfection, and one is not possible in this life; but the other two are. To one of these all men are bound, for this totality can be referred to act, and this is the perfection of the heavenly homeland. In this life, because of many occupations, this perfection is not possible.

556. There is another totality in earthly life, which is that of intention, namely so that you hold God as last end in all your doings, thinking nothing contrary to him. And this is the precept: for all are bound to order themselves and their doings to God.

557. The other is the middle perfection, and this is the perfection of religious: for the more a man extracts himself from the acts of the world, the more he may think of God actually and the more he can approach the likeness of those who are in the heavenly homeland. And this is why the apostles wanted to be poor, not because of poverty, but so that they would be more easily free for contemplation. And thus virginity or continence are of the perfection of the counsel, for married people think on the things that are of the world, and thus they are not brought into the contemplation of God.

558. It is clear, then, that the love that is simple perfection is one thing, the love that is possible to a creature is another, and there is another between the two, as was said.

The Sermon on the Mount Cont.

Almsgiving

6:1 Take heed that you do not your justice before men in order to be seen by them: otherwise you will not have a reward from your Father who is in heaven. [n. 559]

6:2 Therefore when you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be honored by men. Amen I say to you, they have received their reward. [n. 562]

6:3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand does. [n. 565]

6:4 That your alms may be in secret, and your Father who sees in secret will repay you. [n. 567]

559. Take heed that you do not your justice. Above the Lord gave the fulfillment of the law as to the precepts; now he begins to give the fulfillment as to the promises. In the old law temporal things were promised, as Augustine says, which were the two most desirable things, namely, worldly glory and abundance of riches: if you hear the voice of the Lord (Deut 28:1). But the Lord teaches in this chapter not to do works of justice for the sake of temporal goods nor for worldly glory nor for an abundance of wealth.

However, this chapter is divided into two parts. In the first part he teaches that works of justice are not to be done for the sake of earthly glory; second, they are not to be done for riches, at do not lay up for yourselves treasures (Matt 6:19).

Concerning the first he does two things:

first, he sets down the teaching in general;

second, he follows it through its parts, at therefore when you give alms.

Concerning the first he does two things:

first, he sets down the instruction;

second, he assigns the reason for the teaching, at otherwise.

560. Therefore he says take heed. He says take heed significantly, for three reasons. First is that attention is important where something hidden might slip in: so it is with the appetite for human praise. Hence Chrysostom says: it sneaks in and carries off unnoticed everything that is inside; or from the arrow that flies by day (Ps 91:6). Second, attention is important against those things that are hard to resist. Augustine says in The Sentences: they do not easily know what powers for harm the desire for human glory may have, except those who have declared war on them, for even if it is easily not sought when it is denied, still it is sought; when it is relinquished nevertheless it is sought; when it is abandoned, then it is bestowed. And, therefore they could not believe (John 12:39). Third, because the greater the works, the less man can guard against it. Chrysostom: this desire troubles not only the sons of the devil, but also the sons of God; and, Satan stood on his right hand to be his adversary (Zech 3:1), i.e the devil entrapping men through good works.

And he did not say take heed until after he had taken away anger of soul and covetousness and hatred. For the soul subject to passions cannot pay attention to what is borne in the heart: with all care keep your heart (Prov 4:23), and after let your eyes look straight ahead (Prov 4:25).

That you do not do your justice, i.e., works of justice. Justice sometimes represents a vice, namely, when it is presumed upon one’s own powers: they, not knowing the justice of God (Rom 10:3). Sometimes it represents a virtue, as here, that you do not your justice, namely those things that are required of you: for the Lord had said, unless your justice abound (Matt 5:20). And he determines how it could be observed. And if it were altogether for the sake of men’s praise, it would not have any worth, and thus a right intention is necessary. And this is that you do not your justice.

561. But Chrysostom asks: what if I drew a poor man aside? It should be said that if he has glory in his heart and has the intention of glory, it would not have any worth. And thus Gregory says let the work in public be done so that the intention remains hidden. And this is in order to be seen.

But do we always seek glory when we wish to be seen by men? Augustine says that something can be sought in two ways: in one way as an ultimate end, in another way as something necessary to the end. But we seek something properly which we want as our ultimate end. But what we do not seek properly is what we want as necessary to the end: as someone who seeks a ship so that he may go to his country does not properly seek the ship but the country. Hence if therefore you wish to be seen by men so that you give them an example, and for the glory of God, you are not prohibited, for above he says, so let your light shine before men (Matt 5:16). But it is prohibited for your intention to be ordered to it as the principal end. And this is: in order to be seen by them, only, that is. In this way also pleasing men is sometimes reproached: if I yet pleased men, I would not be the servant of Christ (Gal 1:10); sometimes it is praised: as I also in all things please all men (1 Cor 10:33).

562. Next, he assigns the reason for his instruction. Hence otherwise you will have no reward. No one merits anything from someone to whom he gives nothing. Hence whoever does something for the sake of men and not for God’s sake is said to give nothing. Chrysostom says: what wisdom is it to give alms and lose God’s reward? He speaks of this reward: I, the Lord am . . . your reward (Gen 15:1), and above, for your reward is very great (Matt 5:12).

Next, he goes through the parts when he says therefore when you give alms. And this refers to almsgiving, prayer, and fasting. The second is at and when you pray (Matt 6:5); the third, at when you fast (Matt 6:16). And he mentions these three things because, according to Chrysostom, the Lord wanted to instruct against those things by which he had been tempted, namely, gluttony, greed, and vainglory, as is clear above; and fasting is against gluttony, almsgiving is against greed, and prayer is against vainglory: for nothing can conquer it since it is even intensified by good works.

563. It should be considered that these three things are parts of justice in two ways. For it is of satisfactory justice that someone who sins makes satisfaction. But sin is threefold: either against God, against oneself, or against one’s neighbor. Against God one sins by pride: and to this is opposed the humility of prayer: the prayer of him humbling himself (Sir 35:21). We sin against our neighbor by greed, and this is satisfied for by almsgiving. We sin against ourselves by the concupiscence of the flesh, and this is satisfied for by fasting. Jerome says: by prayer the pestilences of the mind are healed, by fasting the pestilence of the body. Likewise these three are parts of justice which is the most proper act of religion: for it belongs to religion to offer sacrifice to God. But there are three kinds of goods, namely the external good of belongings, and the interior ones of body and soul. Thus by almsgiving they offer external goods: do not neglect to do good and to share what you have (Heb 13:16). By fasting they offer their own body: present your bodies as a living sacrifice (Rom 12:1). And by prayer, their souls: for prayer is the raising of the mind to God: let my prayer be directed (Ps 141:2).

Concerning almsgiving, which is first, he does two things: first he excludes the improper mode, second, he sets down the due mode, at but when you give alms. Concerning the first he excludes the improper mode; second, he assigns the reason, at amen I say to you. He excludes the improper mode by three things: sign, place, and end.

564. As to the first, he says therefore when you give alms, necessarily take heed that you do not your justice. Hence since alms are a part of justice, therefore when you give alms, do not. The custom among the Jews was to sound a trumpet when they gave public alms so that the poor would gather around. Thus something that had arisen from a certain necessity was perverted into vainglory by the malice of men. And according to Chrysostom it is the same as sounding a trumpet when you desire to be noticed for a good deed, even if it is done in secret: lift up your voice with strength (Isa 40:9).

As the hypocrites. This is the first thing said about hypocrites. Hence we should see what a hypocrite is. This word ‘hypocrite’ is properly derived and produced from a representation which was done in theatrical plays, where they brought in men having masked faces to represent men whose gestures they imitated. Hence hypocrite was said from ‘hypo’, which is ‘under’, and ‘crisyo’, which is ‘sign’: for in place of someone, another person was seen. And that is what a hypocrite is, someone who has the appearance of sanctity outwardly and inwardly does not fulfill what he shows. Gregory says that it is not someone who falls through weakness, for those are properly hypocrites who seem to have the appearance of sanctity only so that they may be seen.

Next, he excludes the improper mode as to place. And this also is reproached if it is done by pretense, but not if for the sake of example.

565. In the synagogues, just as in the Church of today; and in the streets, as in a public place, so that they may be seen. And this is what he said above, before men; that they may be honored: how can you believe? (John 5:44).

Then he assigns the reason, at amen I say to you: they have received their reward. For this is the reward of each person according to his works: did you not agree with me for a denarius? (Matt 20:13).

Next, he assigns the due and fitting mode of giving alms; and afterward he assigns the reason at that your alms may be. Therefore he says but when you give alms. This has many explanations. For Chrysostom says that in the book of the Canons of the Apostles, it is explained that by the left hand is understood an unbelieving nation, and by the right a believing one. Hence he wishes that nothing be done in front of unbelievers.

566. Against this Augustine says: for someone gives alms either for the sake of glory, and then it should not be seen even by believers; or else for the sake of benefit, and then it should expressly be done before unbelievers: that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father (Matt 5:16).

But others explain that by the left hand is understood a wife who tends to hinder a man from works of mercy; hence he means that even the wife should not know. And the same thing should be understood of anyone else. And Augustine objects similarly against this for this precept is also given to women: therefore no one should say: do not let your right hand know.

567. Hence Augustine explains it another way, as well as Chrysostom, and it can be reduced to practically the same. They say that in Scripture temporal goods are meant by the left, and spiritual ones by the right: length of days is in her right hand (Prov 3:16). Hence the Lord meant that it should not be done for earthly glory. Or another way and it also amounts to the same: by the right hand is sometimes understood the works of virtue, by the left hand, sins; so that when a work of virtue is done, it should not be done with any sin. Nevertheless, Chrysostom gives a literal reading and says that the Lord speaks by exaggeration, as if someone were to say, ‘if it were possible, he would wish that my foot not know this.’

He gives the reason: that your alms may be in secret, and in your conscience which is hidden: the things . . . no man knows (1 Cor 2:11) and again, for our glory is this: the testimony of our conscience (2 Cor 1:12): for in this way is taken what is written: for it is not that he is a Jew who is so outwardly (Rom 2:28).

Your Father . . . will repay you: all things are naked and open to his eyes (Heb 4:13); the heart is perverse above all measure (Jer 17:9). Augustine says that in certain exemplars is found ‘he will repay you publicly,’ for just as the devil tries to open and make public the things that are in the conscience so that he can give scandal, so God for greater benefit and also for the example of evildoers brings forth good things. Hence even many saints could not remain hidden: he will bring forth your justice as the light (Ps 37:6), namely, what you were holding in secret. However, this does not seem to be in the text.

Prayer

6:5 And when you pray, you will not be as the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men: amen I say to you, they have received their reward. [n. 568]

6:6 But you when you will pray, enter into your chamber, and having shut the door, pray to your Father in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will repay you. [n. 575]

6:7 And when you are praying, do not speak much, as the heathens. For they think that in their speaking much they may be heard. [n. 578]

6:8 Be not therefore like to them, for your Father knows what is needful for you, before you ask him. [n. 581]

568. And when you pray. Above the Lord shows what is not to be done regarding almsgiving for the sake of human glory; here he shows the same thing regarding prayer.

And concerning this he does two things:

first, he teaches the way of praying;

second, he teaches what should be in a prayer of petition: therefore you will pray thus (Matt 6:9).

569. Concerning the first he does two things:

first, he teaches them to avoid the vanity of hypocrites in prayer;

second, to avoid the vanity of gentiles, at when you are praying.

570. Concerning the first he does two things:

first, he excludes an unfitting manner of praying;

second, he designates what is fitting, at but you.

571. He excludes the manner of praying by the example of the hypocrites: hence he first excludes this example, second explains, third, assigns the reason. The second is at who love to stand and pray; the third, at amen I say to you.

Fittingly enough after almsgiving, here he deals with prayer, for as Sirach says: before prayer, prepare your soul (Sir 18:23). For by good works, among which almsgiving is first, the soul is prepared for prayer: let us lift up our hearts with our hands (Lam 3:41), which happens when good works accord.

572. And it should be noted that the Lord does not compel us to pray, but teaches us the manner of praying. And this is when you pray, you will not be as the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and street corners. By hypocrites is understood pretenders who do everything for human praise. And although this vice is to be avoided in every work, nevertheless it is especially to be avoided in prayer, according to Chrysostom, because prayer is a certain sacrifice that we offer God from our innermost hearts: let my prayer be directed as incense in thy sight; the lifting up of my hands, as evening sacrifice (Ps 141:2). A sacrifice is not allowed to be offered except to God; but it is offered to men if it is done for human glory. And such prayers are idolatry.

But the hypocrites are described as to their affection, place, pride, and intention. As to the first, he says who love. For sometimes a certain titillation of vainglory happens in holy men, but they are not counted among the hypocrites unless they act for that purpose: in the desire of his heart (Jer 2:24).

573. And note there are two kinds of hypocrites who openly seek human glory, that is, who pray in public places. Hence he says, in synagogues, where the congregation of the people prays: congregation (Ps 82:1). There are others who pray in private places and seek glory by this very avoidance of glory: for they wish to seem to seek privacy, although nevertheless they love what is public. And this is in the synagogues and street corners. For if they were truly seeking secrecy, they would not seek the corners of boulevards, but an enclosed place; or rather they would say that they seek a public area. But there are two kinds of public places: certain ones are set aside for prayer, like synagogues; others are not, namely, street corners. And it is properly a corner where two lines intersect. Hence street corners, where two streets intersect, so that there is a crossroads; and this is extremely public, and not designated for prayer: the stones of the sanctuary are scattered (Lam 4:1).

It should also be noted that one of the things at work in prayer is humility: the prayer of the humble and meek has always pleased you (Jdt 9:16). He has had regard to the prayer (Ps 102:17). But these people stand as though proud.

574. But it seems that in no place would it be forbidden to pray: I wish that men pray in every place (1 Tim 2:8); in the churches bless (Ps 68:26). But it should be said that it is not a sin except under the intention that they may be seen by men. And, as Chrysostom says, although willing to be seen by men is harmful in other works, nevertheless it is especially so in prayer: for it damages both the end and the constancy, for even if it is done with a good intention, a man can scarcely hold his mind so that it does not wander off into diverse things; much less, then, when this is done for the sake of human glory. And this is that they may be seen.

But then should one not pray in a public place? It should be known that the Lord intends to prohibit the manner of praying so that vainglory is removed, which is never sought except by someone on his own, for when there are many who keep one manner of praying, glory is not sought before one another. Hence the Lord removes the individual manner of praying, that namely, no one should pray in a place not designated for prayer, except someone with such authority that he may even lead others in prayer. Hence according to Chrysostom, the fact that he says street corners is to be referred to everything by which you seem to be set apart from the others with whom you associate.

575. Amen I say to you. Here he assigns the reason. And he says two things: reward and their. The reward of each person is that by which he is fed from his work. Hence when we do anything for the glory of men, the glory of men is our reward, although nevertheless we should wait for the true glory of God. And this is they have received their reward because they have usurped it: what things a man will sow, those also will he reap (Gal 6:8).

But you. Here he sets down the due manner. And first he sets it down; second, he assigns the reason: and your Father. Therefore he says when you will pray, i.e., when you are disposed to pray, enter into your chamber. This is explained three ways. First, it is understood literally about a separated room. But do not those who go to the church do the opposite? But it should be said that he speaks of private prayer which is only to be done in a private place. And this for three reasons. First, because it agrees with the faith, for then you confess that God is present everywhere: Lord, all my desire is before you (Ps 38:9); do I not fill heaven and earth? (Jer 23:24). Second, because prayer which in private is quiet, is hindered when with many others: I will lead her into solitude: and I will speak to her heart (Hos 2:14). Third, because vainglory is avoided: and David went in, so that he could pray before the Lord (2 Sam 7:18); alone, that is, and having shut the door, literally, so that you exclude also the possibility of anyone coming in.

576. Second, by the chamber can be understood the secret interior of the heart: the things you say in your hearts (Ps 4:4). Door, mouth: make doors and bars to your mouth (Sir 28:28), as though he said: pray silently. And this for three reasons. First, because it attests to the faith, for then you confess that God knows the thoughts of your heart: man sees those things that appear, but the Lord beholds the heart (1 Sam 16:7). Second, because it is not appropriate that others know your petitions: my secret to myself (Isa 24:16). Third, because if you speak aloud, you may impede others’ prayer: neither hammer nor axe . . . was heard (1 Kgs 6:7).

But what will we say about public prayer? It should be said that the Lord speaks about private prayer in which the benefit of one person is sought, but in public prayer the good of the multitude is also sought. And because some people are excited to devotion by sounds of this kind, chant was instituted. Hence Augustine says in the book of Confessions, that blessed Athanasius, lest he become too delighted by the chants, wanted everything to be read quietly. But because before he converted blessed Augustine found chants very beneficial, he did not dare to speak against them, but approved them.

577. But a question arises: should someone praying in private say words or not? But here it should be distinguished that sometimes words arise from intention, sometimes from the impulse of the heart, for, as is said: who can withhold the words he has conceived? (Job 4:2). Hence by the impulse of the Spirit some people are brought to the point of speaking words, and this is the whole effect.

But words can be considered two ways: either as owed, and then they should be said, like the Hours: I cried to the Lord with my voice (Ps 142:1); or as useful for praying, and then a distinction should be made about the beginning and the end, for better is the end of a prayer than the beginning (Eccl 7:9). For if in the beginning of a prayer the affections are excited to devout prayer by words, then it is useful to bring in words; but when the affections are not excited by this, then no words should be uttered and the affections should be shut up, for just as heat is diminished by evaporation, so affections are emptied out by words, as is also clear in expressing sorrow to others: my heart grew hot within me (Ps 39:3); then I said: I will not make mention of him nor speak any more in his name (Jer 20:9). This is how Chrysostom explains, but having shut the door.

578. In the third way, as Augustine explains, by chamber the heart is meant, by the door the external senses as well as the imagination; for such a person should enter his heart and close his senses and imagination so that nothing comes in except what pertains to his prayer. And Cyprian assigns two reasons: first, because it is blameable if you do not attend to what you say when you speak with any king; second, because how will God understand you if you do not understand yourself? This is the door that is spoken of: I stand at the door and knock (Rev 3:20).

And your Father. Here he assigns the reason. For no one prays except to someone who sees him. But to God all things are naked and open (Heb 4:13). In secret, whether of the heart or of place, he will repay you.

And when you are praying. Here he teaches us to avoid the second vice, namely, the verbosity of the gentiles. And concerning this he does three things: first, he teaches us to avoid the example of the gentiles, second, he sets down the intention, third, he assigns the reason. The second is at for they think; the third, at be not therefore like to them. Therefore he says when you are praying. And note that he does not say: do not pray a lot, for that is against what is said in Romans: constant in prayer (Rom 12:12); and in Luke: in his agony, he prayed the longer (Luke 22:43).

579. He passed the whole night in prayer (Luke 6:12). But he says do not speak much. Augustine, in his book On Prayer: let there not be much speech but much supplication if a fervent intention is not lacking. But much and little, great and small, are relative. For much can be said two ways in relation to prayer, which is a raising up to God. They speak much when the words go outside the prayer, and this can be in two ways: namely, if the words are about something illicit, and these are harmful; and when there is no devotion, then man becomes rather bored and praying becomes hateful. And thus Augustine says that monks in Egypt had frequent but brief prayers. For they saw that devotion was necessary in the one praying, but it was emptied out by a multitude of words. And thus in the Church it was established that different things are said at different hours: speak not anything rashly (Eccl 5:1). Augustine: this matter, that is, prayer, is more in groaning than in words.

580. As the heathens. The gentiles worship demons for their gods: all the gods of the gentiles are devils (Ps 96:5). It should be considered in demons that they do not know the future or hidden things of the heart unless they are revealed to them. Hence it was necessary for the gentiles to say everything with words: Cry louder! Surely he is a god; either he is meditating, or he has wandered away, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened (1 Kgs 18:27).

Likewise, demons have changeable affections: hence by words they can be changed. Hence Augustine says that Plato said that they were flattered by words; but God both knows all things and is not persuaded by words: I, the Lord, do not change (Mal 3:6); God is not a man . . . that he should be changed (Num 23:19); I will not spare them their words framed in prayer (Job 41:3).

581. For they think that in their speaking much they may be heard. Be not therefore like to them. And why? For your Father knows: all my desire is before you (Ps 38:9). Therefore if he knows, we do not need to multiply our words. But it is said: God knows what we need; why then do we pray? And Jerome answers that we do not ask in words so that we may show, but so that we may request.

582. And likewise it can be said: why do we bring forth words? Augustine answers that we act differently in prayer to God than to a man, for with a man words avail greatly in persuading him; but with God, they avail in raising our heart to him. And thus Augustine says that although we should always have an affection for God, nevertheless, it is fitting to pray with words sometimes so that we do not lose it. And as Chrysostom says, by frequent prayer it comes about that man is made familiar with God and God with him: the Lord would speak with Moses (Exod 33:9). Likewise by this, humility comes about, for the highness of God and our own weakness are considered: I will speak to my Lord (Gen 18:27). Likewise, by this a man is directed in his actions and seeks help from God: I have lifted my eyes to the mountains, from whence help will come (Ps 121:1); whatever you do, do it from the heart, as for the Lord, not for men (Col 3:23).

The Our Father

6:9 Therefore you will pray thus: our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be your name. [n. 583]

6:10 Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

6:11 Give us this day our supersubstantial bread.

6:12 And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.

6:13 And lead us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil. Amen.

6:14 For if you will forgive men their offences, your heavenly Father will forgive you also your offences.

6:15 But if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences.

583. Therefore you will pray thus. Above the Lord taught the manner of praying, namely that we avoid both the vanity of the hypocrites and the verbosity of the gentiles. Here he teaches what we should ask in prayer, and concerning this he does two things: first, he gives the title of the prayer, second, he gives the prayer. But he continues to the preceding things in this way: I told you when you pray, you will not be as the hypocrites (Matt 6:5); therefore, so that you may pray with few words, you will pray thus.

And note that the Lord does not say, pray this, but pray thus: for he does not prohibit us from praying with other words, but he teaches the mode of praying. And just as Augustine in his letter to Proba On Prayer says: no one prays as he should unless he asks something that is contained in the Lord’s prayer. But it is fitting that we pray by those words, for as Cyprian says in his book On the Lord’s Prayer: it is a friendly and intimate prayer to ask the Lord with his own words, and he gives the example that it is the usual way among lawyers who put words into the mouths of those who must speak in court. Hence this prayer is the most sure, as it was formed by our advocate who is the wisest, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col 2:3). Hence Cyprian says: since we have in Christ an advocate with the Father for our sins, when we ask for our misdeeds, we utter the words of our advocate; and we have an advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1). Thus it is said, let us go with confidence to the throne of grace (Heb 4:16); and let him ask in faith (Jas 1:6).

And this prayer has three things: brevity, perfection, and efficacy. Brevity, for two reasons: that all may easily learn it, both great and small, for the same is Lord over all, rich unto all who call upon him (Rom 10:12); second, that he might give the surety of obtaining with ease. It is also perfect, hence: the consumption abridged (Isa 10:23), and just as Augustine says, whatever can be contained in other prayers is wholly contained in this; hence he says that if we pray fittingly and rightly, nevertheless whatever words we use, we say nothing else but what is included in the Lord’s prayer: perfect are the works of the Lord (Deut 33:4). It is efficacious because prayer, according to Damascene, is a petition of suitable things from God; you ask and you receive not because you ask wrongly (Jas 4:3). But knowing what to ask for is a difficult thing, just as knowing what to desire: for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself asks for us (Rom 8:26). And because God taught us this prayer, therefore it is the most efficacious, and thus it is said in Luke: Lord, teach us to pray (Luke 11:1).

584. But the Lord does two things in this prayer: first, he gives the prayer; second, he assigns the reason for the prayer, at for if you will forgive men their offences.

But it should be known that in any speech, even those of rhetoricians, before requests are made, good will is won. Hence as is done in a speech that is made to men, the same must be done in a speech to God, but with different intentions in each, for with men good will is won by persuading the mind; but with God by lifting our mind to him. Therefore the Lord sets down two things to capture good will which are needed for someone praying: for it is necessary that he trust the one he asks and that the other wishes to give and is able to; and thus he says Father and who art in heaven. But saying Father avails in five ways. The first is for teaching the faith: for faith is needed in the one praying.

But there were three errors by which prayer was excluded: and two completely destroyed prayer, and the third gave more than was due. And those errors are excluded by his saying our Father. For some people said God did not have care of human things: God has abandoned the earth and does not see it (Ezek 9:9); hence according to this anything asked of God is in vain. Others said that God has providence, but this providence imposes a necessity on things. The third error gave more, for it said that God disposes all things by his providence, but that through prayer the divine disposition is changed.

But these errors are excluded by the fact that he says our Father who art in heaven, for if he is a father, he has providence: but your providence, O Father, governs it (Wis 14:3). Likewise the second error is excluded: for ‘father’ is said by a son, and ‘lord’ by a slave; therefore in the fact that we say ‘Father,’ we call ourselves free children. For when was it ever found in Sacred Scripture that God is called father of insensible creatures, with one exception: who is the Father of the rain? (Job 38:28). Therefore, father is said for a son, and by this we call ourselves free children: for ‘son’ includes the notion of freedom; therefore necessity is not imposed upon us.

But by the fact that he says in heaven a changeable disposition is excluded. But prayer avails so that we might believe that God disposes all things in a way that befits the natures of things: for it is by providence that man pursues his end through his own actions; hence prayer neither changes providence nor is it outside providence, but falls under it. First, therefore, it avails to the teaching of the faith. Second, for the sustenance of hope: for if he is a Father, he wishes to give, because, it is said below that if you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children (Matt 7:11). Third, for exciting charity: for it is natural that a father love his son and vice versa: be imitators of God, as beloved children (Eph 5:1). Therefore by this we are provoked to imitation: for a son should imitate his father as much as he can: you would call me Father (Jer 3:19). Fourth, we are provoked to humility: if then I am a Father, where is the honor due me? (Mal 1:6). Fifth, by this our affections are directed to our neighbor, is there not one Father of us all? (Mal 2:10).

But why do we not say my Father? For two reasons: first, because Christ wanted to reserve this to himself as his own, for he is Son by nature, but we by adoption, which is shared by all: I am ascending to my Father and yours (John 20:17). Second, because according to Chrysostom, the Lord teaches us not to make individual prayers but to pray communally for the whole people: which prayer is indeed more acceptable to God. Hence Chrysostom says: it is a sweeter prayer before the Lord, not which necessity sends up, but which charity does; and pray for one another (Jas 5:16).

Accordingly, who art in heaven belongs to winning the good will of the listener. Which is explained in two ways. First, literally, so that we understand the physical heavens; not that he could be enclosed there, for do I not fill heaven and earth? Says the Lord (Jer 23:24). But it is said on account of his eminence over creation according to Isaiah: heaven is my throne and the earth my footstool (Isa 66:1). Likewise by these words those who cannot be raised above the level of corporeal things are given a new idea; and thus Augustine says that this is the reason we pray facing east, for from the east the heaven arises; and just as the sky is above our bodies, so is God above our spirit. Hence it is given to be understood that our spirit should be converted to God himself, as our body is turned to heaven in praying. But he says who art in heaven, as your intention is raised from earthly things: into an inheritance that is . . . unfading, kept in heaven for you (1 Pet 1:4).

Or, by heaven is understood the saints, according to Isa 1:2: hear O heavens; or: but you dwell in the holy places (Ps 22:3). And he says this to obtain greater confidence, because it is not far from us: you are among us, Lord (Jer 14:9).

585. Hallowed be. Here he sets down petitions, and we may say them first in general, then specifically. In these petitions we must consider three things. For a petition is in service of a desire: for we ask for those things that we wish to have; but in this prayer the entirety of what we desire is contained. Second, the order in which we should desire is contained in it. Third is that these petitions correspond to both gifts and beatitudes.

But it should be known that naturally man desires two things, namely, to seek good and avoid evil. But four goods are set forth here as things to be desired. But desire tends toward an end rather than toward those things ordered to the end; but the last end of all things is God; hence the first desirable thing should be to honor God: do all things for the honor of God (1 Cor 10:31). And this is what we ask first with hallowed be your name. But among things that pertain to us, the last end is eternal life; and this we ask when we say, your kingdom come. The third thing we should seek concerns things for the sake of the end, namely, that we have virtue and good merits, and this is at your will be done; and what we ask for in virtue is nothing but this. Therefore our beatitude is directed toward God, and our virtues toward that beatitude. But it is necessary to have reinforcement, whether temporal or spiritual, like the sacraments of the Church, and this is what we ask at our . . . bread, external or sacramental. In these four things every good is included. But man avoids evil as it is an obstruction to good. But the first good, namely divine honor, cannot be obstructed, because if justice is done God is honored; if evil is done, he is likewise honored in that he punishes it, although he is not honored as much in the one sinning. But sin prevents beatitude, and thus he removes this first by saying and forgive us our debts. Temptation is opposed to the good of virtue, and thus we ask and lead us not into temptation; or any defect that goes against the necessities of life, at but deliver us from evil. Therefore it is clear that whatever is desired, the Lord’s prayer contains in its entirety.

And it should be known that the Holy Spirit can be connected with these petitions, but in a different way, by ascending and descending: ascending, as the first petition is related to fear which causes poverty of the spirit and makes us seek the honor of God, and thus we say hallowed be; descending, so that we say that the last gift, namely the wisdom making us sons of God, is related to this petition. But we will see about this petition hallowed be.

However, it seems to be unfitting: for the name of God is always holy. And it should be said that this has been explained many ways by the saints. First, by Augustine, and I believe that his is the most literal: hallowed be, that is the name that is always holy, should be held holy among men; and this is to honor God: for by this God’s glory does not increase, but our recognition of it: so use them to show your glory to us (Sir 36:4). And fittingly enough after Our Father, who art in heaven, he says, hallowed be, for nothing proves so well the sons of God: for a good son shows honor to his father. According to Chrysostom: hallowed be, by our works, as it were: make us so live that by our works your name appears holy (cf. 1 Pet 3:15). Or according to Cyprian: hallowed be, i.e., sanctify us in your name: sanctify them in your name (John 17:17); and he will be a sanctification to you (Isa 8:14).

And it should be known that hallowed be is first understood as that those who are not holy might become holy: for this prayer is made for the whole human race. Second, hallowed be, i.e., they persevere in holiness; third, hallowed be, so that if anything is mixed in with their holiness, it might be removed: for every day we need sanctification because of our daily sins.

586. Your kingdom come. This petition can correspond to either the gift of understanding which cleanses the heart, or to piety. Your kingdom come: according to Chrysostom and Augustine, the kingdom of God is eternal life, and I believe that this is the literal explanation; therefore we ask your kingdom come, i.e., make us attain and share in eternal beatitude, as later: come, you blessed of my father, receive the kingdom prepared for you (Matt 25:34); or Luke: and I confer on you, as my father has conferred on me, a kingdom (Luke 22:29).

Or, another way, also according to Augustine: your kingdom come. Christ began to reign from the time that he redeemed the world: all power. . . is given to me (Matt 28:18); therefore your kingdom come, i.e., the consummation of your kingdom. And this will be when he puts his enemies under his feet; hence your kingdom, i.e.: Lord, may you come to judge so that the glory of your kingdom appears: when these things begin . . . your redemption is near (Luke 21:28). And the saints long for the coming of Christ, for then they will possess perfect glory: and not only for me but for those also who love his coming (2 Tim 4:8).

Or your kingdom come, i.e., may the reign of sin be destroyed, and you, Lord, reign over us: for when we serve justice then God reigns, but when we serve sin, the devil does: let no sin reign in your body (Rom 6:12); they have not rejected you but me, from reigning over them (1 Sam 8:7).

And note that they could ask justly enough your kingdom come who proved themselves sons by saying our Father: for the inheritance is due to sons, but that kingdom is in heaven. Hence you cannot go there unless you are made heavenly. And thus he adds your will be done, i.e.: make us imitators of the heavenly ones, just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, let us also bear the image of the man of heaven (1 Cor 15:49).

And note that he does not say your will be done, as: may God do our will, but rather: may his will be fulfilled through us, which wills all men to be saved (1 Tim 2:4; 1 Thess 4:3); teach me to do your will (Ps 143:10). In which is destroyed the error of Pelagius, who said that we did not need divine help.

587. As it is in heaven. This is explained in many ways by Augustine. First thus: as it is in heaven, i.e., as angels in heaven do your will, so may we fulfill it on earth; it is said of the angels, his ministers that do his will (Ps 103:21). In which is destroyed the error of Origen who suggested that an angel could sin.

Or another way: your will be done on earth as it is in heaven, i.e., as in Christ, so also in the Church. For from heaven the earth is made fruitful: hence also the gentiles called the gods of heaven male and the gods of the earth female: I came down from heaven . . . to do the will of him who sent me (John 6:38).

Or by the heavens are understood the saints of whom it is said: our citizenship is in heaven (Phil 3:20). But as the heaven is to the earth, so are the saints to sinners; as though: Lord, convert sinners to doing your will.

588. Or your will be done: for as heaven is compared to the earth in the world, so is the spirit to the flesh in man; the spirit, inasmuch as is in it, does the will of God, but the flesh revolts: I see another law in my members (Rom 7:23); create a clean heart in me (Ps 51:10). All these petitions are partly begun now, but in the future they will be fulfilled.

But Chrysostom refers as it is in heaven to all the foregoing things; hence your kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven, and so on with the others. Again, according to Chrysostom, note that he did not say, may we sanctify, nor sanctify, but took a middle way; nor did he say: let us go to the kingdom but your kingdom come. So in all things he held a middle way, and this because two things are required for our salvation: the grace of God and free will; hence if he had said, ‘sanctify’, no place would be given to free will; if ‘may we do it’, all would be given to free will, but he spoke in the mean, and it is: your will be done.

589. Our . . . bread. After he taught us to seek the glory of God, life eternal, and the working of virtue by which we merit life eternal, here he teaches us to seek all the things that are necessary for the present life. But this, our bread, is explained in four ways: for it can be explained by four kinds of bread. First, the bread that is Christ: I am the bread of life (John 6:35), which is especially the bread according to which he is contained under the sacrament of the altar: the bread which I give is my flesh (John 6:52), and again my flesh is true food (John 6:56).

And it says our, for it is not for anyone but the faithful: unto us a child is given (Isa 9:5). For by becoming a member of Christ in baptism, one can partake of this bread: and thus in no way should it be given to unbaptized unbelievers.

590. Supersubstantial bread. Jerome says that in Greek this is ‘epiousion’, and Symmachus translated it ‘special’ or ‘extraordinary’; but the old translation has daily. But what would be supersubstantial, that is, above all substances, appears in Ephesians: which he wrought in Christ . . . setting him . . . above all principality (Eph 1:20–21). He says daily, for it should be received every day, but not by everyone; hence it is said in the book On Church Dogmas: I neither praise nor blame this.

But it should be received daily in the Church, or at least it may be received spiritually by the faithful in faith. But in the eastern church it is not received daily in church, for the Mass is not celebrated daily, but only once a week. But because the Church allows it, it suffices that they receive spiritually every day, and not sacramentally.

591. Give us. If it is ours, how does he say, give us? Cyprian: Give us, i.e., make us so live that we can receive this bread to our benefit; hence whoever asks this, asks nothing else but perseverance in good, namely so that nothing contrary will be mixed in with his sanctity: for whoever eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks judgment to himself (1 Cor 11:29).

592. Give us this day our supersubstantial bread. Here Augustine objects that this prayer is said at every hour of the day, even during Compline; do we ask even then that he give us this bread to eat? But it should be said that this day is taken in two ways: for sometimes it means a definite day, sometimes all this present life; Hebrews touches the definite today (Heb 3:13), hence: grant that in all this present life we may partake of this bread.

And for this reason he says give us this day, because that sacramental bread is only necessary in this life: for when we will see him as he is, we will not need sacraments and signs. Hence this singular and extraordinary bread is only necessary in the present: and now we receive it daily in species, but then we will have it unceasingly.

Second, by bread is understood God, namely, in his divinity: blessed is he who shall eat bread in the kingdom of God (Luke 14:15); mortals ate of the bread of angels (Ps 78:25). Therefore give us today our supersubstantial bread, namely so that we may enjoy it according to the manner of this present life.

Third, the precepts of God can be understood, which are the bread of wisdom: come, eat of my bread (Prov 9:5), for he eats who keeps the commands of wisdom: my food is to do the will of him who sent me (John 4:34). These divine precepts now are bread, for they are ground with a certain difficulty, by considering and doing, but afterward they will be a drink, for they will refresh without difficulty.

Fourth, it is understood literally as physical bread. For the Lord had said your will be done, and he wanted us to be heavenly in fulfillment of the divine will; but mindful of our frailty, he teaches us to ask even for the temporal goods that are necessary to the support of life; hence he does not teach us to seek splendid or superfluous things, but necessities: but if we have food . . . we are content (1 Tim 6:8); thus Jacob asked: if you will give me bread to eat (Gen 28:20).

593. But he says our for two reasons. So that no one will amass temporal things to himself, according to Chrysostom, first because no one should eat bread from plunder, but from one’s own labor; second because we ought to receive temporal goods that are given for necessity so that we may share them with others: if I have eaten my morsel alone . . . let my shoulder fall from its joint (Job 31:17–22).

And Augustine says in the book to Proba On Prayer, that whatever is chief and most excellent in all particulars, represents the whole to our faculty: for bread is most necessary to man: the chief thing for man’s life is water and bread (Sir 29:21). And this is supersubstantial for it chiefly pertains to necessity.

594. But if he says: daily, then there are two reasons, according to Cyprian. First, that you not seek temporal goods for a long time, for otherwise you would act contrary to yourself: for you say, your kingdom come, but as long as we are in the body we are away from the Lord (2 Cor 5:6). Hence by saying your kingdom come, and seeking a long life, you act against yourself. Or he says daily against the prodigals who spend excessively and do not use daily bread, which nourishment suffices for one day.

But if it is ours, why does he say give us? For two reasons, according to Chrysostom. First, temporal goods are given to good and bad men, but in different ways: for they are to the benefit of the good, but to the blame of the wicked who use them badly; hence to the wicked it is not given because they abuse it, and this is done not by God but by the devil. And he says that it is the same as if someone offered bread to a priest to consecrate and afterward he asked for it back; he could say: give me the bread that is my possession from sanctification.

595. He says today because he does not want us to ask for things for a long time. But Augustine raises the question that the Lord afterward teaches us not to have anxiety about temporal things: Therefore do not worry, saying: what will we eat? (Matt 6:31).Therefore it seems that we should not pray for temporal things. And he answers that we can pray for every licitly desirable thing, for we expect to receive desirable things from God, and whatever we expect from God we can ask for; and this is not only in extreme necessity, but also what befits our state. But it is one thing to desire, another to worry about something as if it were the last end, for this is what God forbids, as will be said later.

But again it is asked concerning give us this day, for it seems that we should not desire beyond one day; therefore all those who desire otherwise sin, and then human life will perish, for no one will harvest in summer so that he may eat in winter. And it should be said that the Lord does not intend to forbid someone from thinking about the future, but he prohibits being seized by anxiety ahead of time: for if now concern presses something upon you, you should do it, but it cannot press upon you what is to come.

596. And forgive us. Here he begins to place petitions which belong to the removal of evil. And first he lists the one by which the particular evil is removed, namely, the evil of guilt; hence and forgive us. It is repugnant that a man who lives by God’s things would live against God. Debts are sins, for we are obligated to God in debt for our sins: for if you have received anything unjustly from anyone, you are bound to restitution; and because when you sin you usurp what is God’s, for it is of God that every will be ruled according to the will of God, therefore you take away what is God’s and you are bound to restitution. But you are absolved when you endure something against your will according to God’s will, as is said later: I forgave you all that debt (Matt 18:32).Therefore, forgive us our debts, that is, sins: forgive me that I may be refreshed (Ps 39:13).

And with this word two heresies are refuted, that of Pelagius and that of Novatian. Pelagius said that some perfect men in this life could live without sin and fulfill Ephesians: so that he may present to himself a glorious church, having no spot or wrinkle (Eph 5:27). But if so then we could not say forgive us: a just man shall fall seven times (Prov 24:16); if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves (1 John 1:8). Novatian said that a man who sins mortally after baptism cannot do penance. But if so, then we would say forgive us in vain: he gave to them power to become sons of God (John 1:12), namely, by adoption in grace.

597. As we forgive our debtors. But debtors can be of two kinds: either because they have sinned against us, or because they owe money; but he does not advise us to forgive this second kind of debt, but any sins, even to the loss of our temporal goods: for it is unfitting to ask pardon from God and not to give it to a fellow slave: A man keeps anger against a man and expects healing from God? (Sir 28:3); and pay your neighbor again in due time (Sir 29:2).

But what is to be said of those who do not wish to forgive and nevertheless say Our Father? It seems that they should never say it because they lie; hence it is said that some people omitted that phrase as we also forgive. But this is disproved by Chrysostom in two ways: first, because it does not preserve the Church’s form in praying, second, because the prayer is not received by God when what Christ dictated is not preserved. Hence it should be said that he does not sin by saying Our Father, however much he may be in rancor and grave sin, for such people should do whatever they can of good, both alms and prayers and such things that dispose one to the recovery of grace. Nor does he lie, for this prayer is not founded on our proper person but on the whole Church, and certainly the Church forgives the sins of all who are in the Church; but such a person loses the fruit of the prayer, for only those who forgive obtain the fruit.

But it seems that not only those who forgive offenses obtain this fruit. But it should be known that Augustine resolves this as it pertains to the present, for it was said above concerning the love of enemies that God wants us to forgive offenses to the extent that he forgives our sins: but he only forgives those asking; and thus whoever is so disposed that he is prepared to give pardon to anyone who asks, he will not lose the fruit of this prayer as long as in general he does not have hatred for anyone, as was said above.

598. And lead us not. Here he sets down another petition. Another text has and do not inflict on us, and another has and do not allow us, and here is the explanation for it: for God tempts no one, although he permits him to be tempted. And he does not say: do not permit us to be tempted, for temptation is a useful thing, and one is tempted so that what is known to God becomes known to him and others: what does he know, who has not been tried? (Sir 34:9). But he says, lead us not, that is, do not permit us to succumb, as if someone said: I want to be heated in fire but not burned up: God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above what you can bear (1 Cor 10:13).

In this telling the error of Pelagius is refuted in two respects: for he said that a man could persevere by his free will without the help of God, which is nothing but not succumbing to temptation. Likewise he said that God could not change the wills of men. But if so, he would not say and lead us not into temptation, which is the same as: make us not consent; therefore it is in his power to change the will or not to change it: it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work (Phil 2:13).

599. But deliver us. This is the last petition. Deliver us, from evil past, present, and future, guilt and punishment, and from every evil. Augustine: in these words every Christian in every kind of tribulation pours out his tears and groans: deliver me from my enemies (Ps 59:1); who are you that you fear a mortal man? (Isa 51:12).

600. Amen, that is, let it be done. This no one wanted to translate on account of reverence, for the Lord often used this. In this is given sureness of obtaining our request, as long as those things that were said are preserved.

But it should be known that in Hebrew three phrases are added, which Chrysostom explains. The first is for yours is the kingdom, afterward and the power and the glory. Amen. And it seems to correspond to three things above: yours is the kingdom to your kingdom come; power to your will be done; glory to Our Father, and to everything else that is for God’s honor. Or otherwise, as though to say: you can do those other things because you are the king, and thus no one can; yours is the power, and thus you can give the kingdom; yours is the glory, and thus not to us Lord but to your name give glory (Ps 115:1).

601. For if you forgive. The Lord attaches a certain condition to the prayer, namely, forgive; but this condition here could seem burdensome to someone; and thus the Lord shows the reason for it. And concerning this he does two things: first he shows that this condition is useful; second, necessary. It is useful because by it we obtain the remission of sins, and this is for if you forgive men their offenses, which they have sinned against you, your Father will forgive what you have sinned against him: forgive your neighbor (Sir 28:2).

But note that he says if you forgive men; for men, as long as they live innocently, are gods; but when they sin, they fall into the human condition: I said, you are gods (Ps 82:6) and after, but you will die like mortals (Ps 82:7): therefore, you who are gods and spiritual beings, forgive the sinful men.

Again, note that he says your Father; for offenses which are according to men are done because of something earthly; on the other hand, celestial men who have a Father in heaven should have no discord for the sake of anything earthly: be merciful as your Father is merciful (Luke 6:36).

This condition is also necessary, for without it there can be no remission of sins, hence but if you do not forgive. Nor is it surprising for no sin can be forgiven without charity: charity covers all sins (Prov 10:12). For whoever hates someone is not in charity, and thus his sins will not be forgiven him: man keeps anger against man and expects healing from God? (Sir 28:3); judgment without mercy to him who has no mercy (Jas 2:13).

602. But someone might believe from this that this is how sins should be forgiven, and therefore the Church sins when she does not forgive. It should be said that if someone seeks pardon, one would sin if one did not forgive. But if he did not seek it, then one does not forgive either because of hatred, and that is a sin, or because of the sinner’s good or that of others, so that, for example, evil may not be repeated, and that is not a sin.

Fasting

6:16 And when you fast, be not as the hypocrites, sad. For they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Amen I say to you, they have received their reward. [n. 603]

6:17 But you, when you fast anoint your head, and wash your face; [n. 607]

6:18 That you appear not to men to fast, but to your Father who is in secret: and your Father who sees in secret, will repay you. [n. 609]

603. When you fast. After he has defined the manner of praying and giving alms, here he defines the manner of fasting. And first he excludes the unfitting manner; second, he adds the truth at but you.

Concerning the first he does three things:

first, he teaches us to avoid the example of the manner of hypocrites;

second, he shows this example;

third, he assigns the reason of his teaching,

604. The second is at they disfigure;

the third, at amen.

605. Fittingly enough after prayer he treats of fasting, for prayer is thin when not accompanied by fasting. And it is not because prayer is the raising of the mind to God, but the more the flesh is strengthened, the more prayer is weakened: prayer with fasting is good (Tob 12:8). And everywhere that it reads that some solemn prayer is done, mention is made of fasting (cf. Dan 9:3); or sanctify a fast (Joel 2:15).

Therefore he says when you fast. Chrysostom: he does not say, do not be, for it is impossible for those fasting not to fall into feelings of sadness, just as on the other hand, those who fast are made happy by eating and drinking. But he says, do not become, that is, do not exert yourself to show your sadness externally, but by inward sorrow for sins: worldly grief produces death (2 Cor 7:10); do not give yourself over to sorrow, nor afflict yourself by your own counsel (Sir 30:21).

606. Like the hypocrites, that is, by this intention. Hypocrites are called so from simulators, who simulate the person of a just man, as was explained above. But when they become sad, he adds they disfigure their faces. Jerome: this they disfigure was improperly set down as metaphorically, for ‘exterminare’ properly means ‘to put outside the boundaries’: hence it is taken from those exiled from a nation. Hence it is said that Saul banished magicians and diviners from the land. But here it is properly said that they destroy. Or it could be said that they disfigure their faces, by placing them beyond the common manner. So that they may seem: this is their prayer; a man is known by his look, and by the encounter of his face (Sir 19:29).

Note that, according to Augustine, here glory is not only sought in resplendence of clothing, but even in shabbiness of clothing; and according to him this is more dangerous, for the fact that others deceive by splendid clothes and the like, cannot harm since it is recognized, but when it is sought from the squalor of the body it can be a danger because if a man is not spiritual he can easily be led into error. Nevertheless Augustine says that such a man can be detected from his other acts, for if in one area he pursues the abjection of the world and in another he acquires profit, he is a faker. But if some hypocrites make use of shabby clothes to hide their malice, should those who do it for the sake of God abandon it? It should be said no, for as the Gloss says, the sheep should not abandon its fleece although the wolf sometimes disguises himself in it.

607. Amen. He assigns the reason for his teaching: for it is stupid to lose an eternal reward for the sake of men’s praise: I, God . . . am your great reward (Gen 15:1).

But you. Here he sets down the proper mode of fasting. And concerning this he does three things: first, he sets down the mode; second, he assigns the reason; third, the benefit. Therefore he says but you, like in: let your garments always be white and do not let oil be lacking on your head (Eccl 9:8). And Augustine here raises the question that although the custom among many is to wash their face every day, nevertheless to anoint one’s head is considered lasciviousness: does the Lord then want this? Likewise, Chrysostom says that fasting should be done secretly; but whenever we see someone anointed we say that he is fasting.

608. Jerome responds to these objections three ways. He says, and I believe this is the most literal, that the custom in Palestine at that time was that men anointed their heads and washed their faces every day. Hence it said these things: I have nothing but a little oil to anoint myself (2 Kgs 4:2). Hence that custom is considered necessary. Therefore the Lord wishes to say that the man who fasts should not change his mode of living, which is that he anoint his head and wash his face.

Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom, the Lord speaks by way of excess, as he also did above at but when you give alms. Because, if it were fitting, you should do all things together with the hypocrites. Third, according to Augustine and also Chrysostom, the Lord speaks by way of likeness. And this is the mystical interpretation. By the head two things are understood: the head of the man is Christ (1 Cor 11:3). But you anoint the head when you show mercy to your neighbor, as below: whatever you did to one of these little ones, you did to me (Matt 25:40). Or, according to Augustine, the head of the man is his reason, or spirit, which is a man, as though, ‘You should so afflict your flesh that your inward spirit is renewed through devotion’: though our outward man is corrupted, what is inward is renewed day by day (2 Cor 4:16). Our outward man, that is, the flesh, exposed to evils, is corrupted; what is inward, that is the soul, fortified in hope of the future, is not affected by human frenzy; it is renewed day by day, i.e., it is a friend made constantly purer by the fire of tribulation.

609. But he says wash your face, i.e., your conscience. For as man is made agreeable because of a respectable face for men, so is a pure conscience before God: Those who love a pure heart . . . will have the king as a friend (Prov 22:11); is this the fast that I chose? (Isa 58:5). And he says, anoint your head, and not wash it, for Christ does not need cleansing, like our conscience.

Lest you appear. This is the reason, to be understood of individual fasts, not of group fasts. But your father who is in secret of eternity: hidden from the eyes of all (Job 28:21). Or in the secret of your conscience, for God lives in us by faith.

610. Will repay you. He will repay each according to his works (Rom 2:6), as he searches the hearts and depths (Ps 7:9).

Seek first the kingdom of God

6:19 Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth: where the rust and moth consume, and where thieves break through and steal. [n. 611]

6:20 But lay up to yourselves treasures in heaven: where neither the rust nor moth consumes, and where thieves do not break through, nor steal. [n. 613]

6:21 For where your treasure is, there is your heart also. [n. 614]

6:22 The light of your body is your eye. If your eye be sound, your whole body will be lightsome. [n. 614]

6:23 But if your eye be evil your whole body will be darksome. If then the light that is in you is darkness: the darkness itself, how great will it be. [n. 614]

6:24 No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. [n. 619]

6:25 Therefore I say to you, be not solicitous for your soul, what you should eat, nor for your body, what you should put on. Is not the life more than the meat: and the body more than the raiment? [n. 622]

6:26 Behold the birds of the air, for they neither sow, nor do they reap, nor gather into barns: and your heavenly Father feeds them. Are not you of much more value than they? [n. 624]

6:27 And which of you by taking thought, can add to his stature one cubit? [n. 627]

6:28 And for raiment why are you solicitous? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they labor not, neither do they spin. [n. 628]

6:29 But I say to you, that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed as one of these. [n. 629]

6:30 And if the grass of the field, which is today, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, God does so clothe: how much more you, O you of little faith? [n. 629]

6:31 Be not solicitous therefore, saying, what will we eat: or what will we drink, or with what will we be clothed? [n. 630]

6:32 For after all these things do the heathens seek. For your Father knows that you have need of all these things. [n. 630]

6:33 Seek you therefore first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things will be added unto you. [n. 630]

6:34 Be not therefore, solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own evil. [n. 630]

611. Do not lay up for yourselves treasures. Above, the Lord prescribed that we not do works for the sake of glory; here he teaches that we should not set riches as our end in good works. For there are two evils: greed and vainglory, which follow upon each other. For many seek riches not for their needs but for ostentation.

Or it can be continued like this. Above, the Lord did not teach or admonish us to do almsgiving or prayers, but rather he taught the manner of doing them; now he wants to induce us to do these works. And first, almsgiving; second, praying, at ask and you shall receive; third, fasting, at the way is narrow.

612. Or another interpretation. Above, he taught how we should do alms and fasting, and not for glory; here he wants to show completely that no man can serve two masters. But the first reading, from Chrysostom, is more consonant with the text.

Therefore according to this sense, for all men are, as it were, the same, he does two things: first, he teaches us to avoid excessive concern for riches, second, anxiety for necessities, at now I say to you. Concerning the first he does two things: first, he warns us not to amass excess riches. And he proves it by reason of its instability; second, from the harm that comes from it at where your treasure is. Concerning the first he does two things: first, he sets forth the instability of earthly riches; second, he sets down the stability of heavenly riches that we should amass, at lay up treasures in heaven.

Therefore he says first: I say thus that you should not do good works for earthly glory, but also do not amass riches. And this is Do not lay up . . . treasures on earth, i.e., in any earthly thing. But according to this it seems that kings and bishops act against this precept. But it should be said that two things are understood in treasure, namely abundance, which is twofold, necessary or excess. For it is excessive for a private man to amass riches; but not for a king, who needs it for the care and defense of his kingdom. Hence this is forbidden, namely to amass riches beyond the needs of one’s person or office. The other thing that is understood by treasure is the trust that is placed in it; and this is also forbidden. And this is do not lay up treasure for yourselves: charge the rich of the present age not to be highminded . . . but to trust in God (1 Tim 6:17); those who laid up silver and gold . . . where is the trace of their works? (Bar 3:18).

613. Next, he shows the instability. Where rust, and he sets down three kinds of things by which riches are literally destroyed. For riches can be had as precious metals, or in clothing, or in precious stones; and thus metals are consumed by rust, clothes by moths, while thieves carry off jewels. Or otherwise, another text has at where moth also feasts are consumed and cleared away, and Chrysostom explains this. For temporal things are destroyed in three ways: on the part of the thing, for from clothing comes a moth; by the extravagance of the owner: hence he says feasts are consumed; and from outside causes, hence he says thieves. But it could be said that this does not always happen. And Chrysostom says that if it does not always happen, nevertheless it often happens and if not often, nevertheless it is possible. And the Lord wants to argue this, for he teaches us to set our hope on lasting and stable things: what was left, the locust has eaten (Joel 1:4).

Mystically, rust appears but moth is hidden. Hence by rust can be understood carnal sins, but by moth spiritual ones: for some sins are committed against oneself, and this is understood as rust and moth; some sins are committed in scandal of another, and this is thieves. Or otherwise, tarnish blackens pretty things: hence it can be understood as pride which infiltrates good works so that they perish like corrosion in copper (Sir 12:10); the moth corrodes the clothes which are the external works that are consumed by envy: like a moth in clothing or a worm in wood, sorrow gnaws at the human heart (Prov 25:20). But demons, when they cannot deceive, stealthily drag someone into vainglory. And this is where thieves. Having shown earthly instability, he sets forth the stability of the heavenly treasure. Hence they store up treasure, i.e., they amass a multitude of rewards in heaven.

And it should be noted, according to Augustine, that it is not to be understood about the physical heavens, for we should fix our hearts on no physical thing, nor have our treasure there. Hence it is understood about heaven, i.e., in spiritual goods, i.e., in God himself: the heaven of heaven is the Lord’s (Ps 115:16). And he says lay up treasure, for if a fleshly man wishes to amass more and more on earth, it should not be enough for him that he have just any status in heavenly things, but that he have a greater reward. And thus he says lay up treasure, i.e., grow rich in rewards: and he says for yourselves because as is said: if you do justice, what more shall you give him? (Job 35:7).

614. But how treasures are to be laid up is shown: if you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give the money to the poor (Matt 19:21). Therefore treasure is laid up by giving alms. And thus Chrysostom says that here he induces us to give alms. This is the incorruptible treasure, for it can neither have corruption in itself nor rust on the part of its body: this corruptible body must put on imperishability (1 Cor 15:53); nor on the part of the soul: your people shall all be righteous (Isa 60:21); nor from outward causes, which lie in wait to attack, i.e., demons. And this is where thieves, for whether secretly or openly, they will not kill or harm in all my holy mountain (Isa 11:9).

Where your treasure is. Here he wants to show what we owe to heaven and not first because of the harm that comes from it. And this is for two reasons: first, the distraction of the heart; second,the alienation from God, at no one can serve two masters. Concerning the first he does two things: first, he sets forth the harm of a distracted heart; second, he shows the magnitude of its damage, at the light of your body. Therefore he says: I said that thieves pillage; but there remains something unfitting: hence where your treasure is. For where love is, there the eye is: we look not at what can be seen but at what cannot be seen, for . . . what cannot be seen is eternal (2 Cor 4:18); and on the other hand, the eyes of a fool look to the end of the earth (Prov 17:24).

And because few consider this loss, namely the destruction of the heart, for this reason the Lord shows how great the danger is by a certain example; hence the lamp of your body: by sensible things he instructs us about intellectual things. So that this can be read two ways. First, as though the Lord proposes a likeness to the physical heavens, and afterward he modifies the comparison to spiritual things, at if the light in you is darkness. And this explanation is plain. And concerning this he does three things: first, he shows the role of the eye, second, the benefit of the good, and third, the damage in hidden evil.

Therefore he says the lamp of the body is physically the eye, which directs like a lamp. If your eye be sound, i.e., strong at seeing, according to Jerome, otherwise it could not be understood as a physical eye; hence sound is strong in seeing. For when a man has a weak eye, one thing seems two. Hence if an eye can be fixed on one thing because of fortitude, the whole body will be lightsome: for by the light of the eye, light is caught for directing all the members in their acts. But if your eye is evil, i.e., disturbed, namely, by infection, also the body, i.e., all the members, will act as though in the dark.

615. Accordingly he modifies therefore if the light that is in you, namely, the light of reason, be darkness, how great the darkness itself. About this light, a Psalm says: the light of your face is stamped upon us (Ps 4:6). Therefore he wants to say that if the heart which is the eye of the soul becomes darkened by training itself upon earthly things, the other eyes, which are darkened by their nature, for they cannot recognize any but corporeal things, will be in the greatest darkness. Hence if reason, which is capable of spiritual things, is directed to earthly things, then all the senses are directed to earthly things. And this is therefore if the light in you. Or another way. The Lord wants to speak here about the spiritual eye; and he brings up therefore if the light in you, to prove what has been said in this passage by a lesser example, and the rest is as before.

Therefore he says the lamp of your body is your eye. This eye can be explained in four ways, namely, reason, as was said, and this is the interpretation of Chrysostom and Hilary. For as a lamp illuminates for seeing, so reason illuminates for acting: the human spirit is the lamp of the Lord, searching the innermost (Prov 20:27).

616. If your eye be sound, i.e., if your reason is completely directed to one thing, namely, God, your whole body shall be; and if worthless, that is, trained on earthly things, your whole body shall be darkened. And this can be understood in two ways. For it will be full of light or darkness as to present works. Full of light, if all outward members work for God’s sake. And this happens if reason be directed to God, for then the members are preserved pure from sin, since sin does not occur except by the consent of the mind. But darkness, if reason was occupied by earthly things, for then the members were occupied by dark works: lay aside the works of darkness (Rom 13:12).

Or otherwise, according to Hilary, if your eye, i.e., if reason be simply directed to God, your whole body will be filled with light, for from the brightness of the soul, brightness overflows to the body: thus the just will shine like the sun (Matt 13:43). But if worthless . . . your whole body will be darkened.

617. In another way, according to Augustine. By the eye is understood the intention. For as a man first looks at the distance to his destination, and then he sets out, so also in working he first determines the end and from that end his intention proceeds to working. Therefore the eye directs: her lamp does not go out at night (Prov 31:18). Hence if the intention were pure, the work or the accumulation of works proceeding from this intention will also be pure. And this is to be understood of those thing that are good in themselves, for as Romans says: the condemnation is deserved (Rom 3:8) of those who said: let us do evil that good may come of it. But if the intention was perverse, the entire work is rendered dark. Nor should it seem strange if by works the body is signified, for in the same way it is said: mortify your earthly members (Col 3:5).

Third, he sets down: the eye of the soul is faith which directs the whole work: your word is a lamp to my feet (Ps 119:105). It is sound when it does not vacillate, but works by love (Gal 5:6). But if faith were corrupted, the whole body, i.e., the work, is full of darkness: all that is not of faith is sin (Rom 14:23).

618. Or another way. The eye is the prelate who is raised on high, according to 2 Samuel: David’s men said to him, you shall go no more into battle with us, lest you put out the lamp of Israel (2 Sam 21:17) and as the people’s judge is, so are his ministers (Sir 10:2). But the fact that he says if then the light that is in you, by the first interpretation he syllogizes from the things he said before, but according to these what was said before is the proof, as though: ‘You say if your eye, the proof is: If then the light that is in you is darkness, how much less is seen the darkness itself.’ If the light of reason is darkened, so will its work be. And as to this the explanation is not changed, but as to other things it is, for as Augustine says, anyone can know of what kind his intention is, but he cannot know what kind of effects the work will have. Hence the lamp is intention, but the work is darkness: all that is made manifest by the light becomes visible (Eph 5:13). But the work is not made manifest.

Or another reading, according to Chrysostom. There are two kinds of works, of light and of darkness (cf. Rom 13:12). The works of light are the works of justice. If then a work of justice in you should be darkened, that is, it is done for a bad intention, how great will be the darkness itself, that is, the evil actions.

Or another way: if faith becomes bad, all other things that are directed by faith become bad, and likewise if a prelate is bad how much more those beneath him.

619. No man can serve two masters. Above the Lord gave one teaching that we should not amass treasures on earth, for the heart is distracted by this; now he mentions another thing that explicitly alienates us from God: and this is no one can serve. Or it can be continued with another interpretation. Above, he warned that we should not amass treasures on earth but in heaven, but someone could say: ‘I want to amass them in heaven and on earth.’ And thus the Lord here shows this to be impossible, saying no man can. But the first explanation is better, and it is Chrysostom’s.

But this text can be read two ways. First, so that no man can serve is understood as a conclusion or inference and then the Lord, according to the interpretation of Chrysostom and Jerome, proceeds from common opinions to present his point. It can be read in another way, as the Lord first proposes what he intends and afterwards he proceeds, and this is Augustine’s reading. But let us examine both ways.

620. Therefore according to the first explanation, he does two things: first, he sets down the common opinion and custom of men; second, he gives the reason, at for he will either hate one. Therefore he says no man can serve two masters. But the reason for this appears if we take what a slave is, properly speaking, and what a slave’s master is, for the definition consists in the fact that he is another’s, namely, his master’s. Hence his end is his master. But it is impossible that one be directed to two things as last ends. Therefore if to be a slave is to order one’s acts to one’s master as their last end, it is impossible to serve two masters: for the bed is too narrow to lie upon (Isa 28:20). But a slave could have two masters of which one is under the other, as one end can be under another. Or according to the Gloss: No man can serve two masters who oppose each other, for if they agree, they are one.

He assigns the reason: for he will hate the one. And it should be known that there are two kinds of rulership. For some rule so that they are loved by those beneath them, and this is royal rule. Some rule so that they are feared, and this is the rule of tyrants. Therefore if a slave has love for his master, then it must be that he will hate a contrary one; but if the slave holds him in fear then it must be that you endure, that is, you tolerate, also the other. And this is or he will endure the one and despise the other. About this rule that is more to be endured than to be loved, Proverbs says: when the wicked contrive to assume power, the people groan (Prov 29:2), that is, they will endure, by patiently tolerating. Therefore no man can serve two. But God and the devil are opposite, for they incline to opposite things: therefore you cannot serve God and mammon, which is ‘riches’ in the Persian tongue, according to Jerome.

However it should be known that to be rich in wealth is not the same as to serve it. For some men are rich and nevertheless ordered to the good, and they are not slaves to riches; others possess riches and nevertheless they do not take physical or spiritual benefit from them, and these are slaves to riches, for they ruin themselves trying to amass riches: There is another evil that . . . lies heavy upon humankind: God gives riches to some . . . yet allows a stranger to enjoy them (Eccl 6:1–2). For in whatever thing a man establishes his last end, that thing is his god: whose god is their belly (Phil 3:19). Or by mammon is understood the devil who controls wealth, not because he could bestow it, but because he uses it to deceive. A certain spirit is in charge of individual vices: hence he is called the spirit of avarice; by avarice he lures men into sin. This is one explanation of this.

621. No man can serve may be read as inferred and general. But Augustine understands it specifically, namely, about God and the devil who are opposed to one another: what concord does Christ have with Belial? (2 Cor 6:15). And you cannot be partakers of both: how long will you limp between two sides? (1 Kgs 18:21). Or he will endure the one, that is, the devil, and love the other, that is, God. And note that he did not say, ‘And vice versa’ but he said, or he will endure the one, because every creature naturally tends to loving God; but the devil who has a depraved nature is abhorred at once, since no one loves evil. And thus he said, or he will endure the one, for the devil is endured like an oppressive tyrant, as someone would endure the master of the slave girl that he was married to, not that he loved the master, but on account of the slave girl, so someone greedy endures the devil on account of the greed which is the devil’s slave girl. Hence when someone wants to prosper in any sin, by the fact that he prospers he suffers the slavery of the devil. And this is or he will endure the one. And to the extent that he endures it he will fall away from the commands of God and despise them when falling. And this is and he will despise the other.

But it is objected here about the fact that it is said that God is not hated, for the Psalm says the pride of those who hate you ascends continually (Ps 74:23). Therefore by this authority someone hates God. Augustine in his Book of Retractions retracts what he had previously said, that God is not hated. But nevertheless both are true, for considering what God is, namely, goodness itself, he cannot be hated, for good is always loved in itself. But he can be hated as to his effect which is contrary to the will. Therefore in this way it is clear that no one can serve two masters: woe to the sinner going on the earth a double path (Sir 2:12).

622. Therefore I say to you. After the Lord has shown that we must not place our end in earthly and unneeded treasures, he wants to show also that we must not place it in acquiring necessities. And this is therefore I say to you. And concerning this he does two things: first, he forbids anxiety for necessities as to the present; second, as to the future, at do not be solicitous. Concerning the first he does two things: first, he proposes what he intends; second, he proves his proposition, at is not your life. Therefore he says, therefore I say to you, as though: ‘Because you cannot serve God and mammon, therefore no one should serve riches so that you may serve God.’

Neither for your soul. But it seems that a soul does not require food. But it should be said that although it does not need it in itself, nevertheless it needs it as joined to a body, for it could not be there otherwise. Or the life of an animal is called ‘the soul’ here: who loves his life will lose it (John 12:25).

Nor for your body. Note that by this word heresies have taken root. For according to Augustine there were some who said it was not permitted for a contemplative man to work; and against them Augustine wrote the book On the Work of Monks. But how the Lord’s words are to be understood we should investigate by the saints. But 2 Thess 3:10 says: whoever does not wish to work, let him not eat, and he will realize it from the work of his hands, as is clear by the things said beforehand. Hence even the Apostle himself worked by his hands as an example.

623. But are all bound to this? If all, it is either a precept or a counsel; if a precept, no one should omit to do it; if a counsel, to whom was this counsel given? Certainly to the crowd, for at that time there were no religious. But no one is bound to a counsel except by a vow: therefore they could all stop doing it. It should be said that this is a precept and all are bound to it, for it is given to all: for the Apostle speaks to the whole Church. But something is commanded in two ways: for itself and for the sake of something else. For example, if you undertake to go overseas on crusade, it is commanded that you go, and it is commanded in itself; but that you seek a ship, this is not commanded for itself but for the sake of something else, for whoever is bound to a certain end is also bound to all the things that are needed for that end. But whoever is bound to the preservation of his life by the law of nature is therefore also bound to all those things by which life is preserved. Therefore if someone has the means to live, he is not bound to work with his hands, and thus the Apostle does not say: ‘we command you to work with your hands,’ but whoever does not wish to work, as though: ‘you are bound to work in whatever way allows you to eat.’ But who are bound to work with their hands is a question to set aside at present.

About the fact that he says solicitous, it should be known that solicitude pertains to foresight, but not every kind of foresight is solicitude. But solicitude properly means foresight with diligence, which is the vehement application of the soul. Hence here solicitude conveys the vehement application of the soul. But in this vehement application there can be sin in four ways. The first is when there is solicitude for temporal goods as the last end; and this is reproached: the expectation of the solicitous shall perish (Prov 11:7). Second, when someone aims for the pursuit of temporal goods excessively, and in this way is taken: to the sinner God has given vexation, and superfluous care, to heap up and to gather together (Eccl 2:26), and afterward, and this is vanity and futile solicitude of the mind. Third, when the soul occupies itself too much in thinking about temporal things. Hence Jerome says: solicitude is to be avoided but labor is to be accomplished, and in this way is taken: whoever is married is solicitous for his wife (1 Cor 7:28), for his heart is distracted by different things. Fourth, when there is solicitude with a certain fear and desperation. For it seems to some that they can never acquire as much as could be enough for them. And all these things are forbidden here, as is clear from what follows. And 1 Sam 9:20 is taken according to this last way: be not solicitous to seek after the donkeys, that is, do not despair of finding them.

Is not your life. Above the Lord taught us not to be solicitous about necessities; here he gives the reason for this admonition. And he sets down three reasons: the first is taken from the greater, the second from the lesser, and the third from the opposite. The second is at look at the birds; the third, at be not solicitous therefore.

624. The first is thus: the one who gave the greater things will give the lesser ones. But the Lord gave the soul and body, therefore he will give food. And this is is not your soul, i.e., life, for we do not live so that we may eat but vice versa. For eating is ordered to life and thus life is simply better, as the end is better than those things that are ordered to the end. And likewise clothing is for the sake of the body and not vice versa. But the fact that God gave the soul and the body is found when first God formed the matter for the body, he breathed into matter for the soul. But the one who gave it will preserve it, by giving those things that are necessary: God created all things that they might be (Wis 1:14).

Hilary explains it another way. For because solicitude conveys something of uncertainty, God wants to remove doubt of the future resurrection of the soul. Be not solicitous, i.e., do not wish to disbelieve in the resurrection for the one who will reform your body in the resurrection will preserve it without clothing or food. But this is not the literal sense.

Then the second reason is set down from the lesser things, and it is like this. The one who provides for lesser things about which less is seen will also provide for greater things. But God provides for plants and birds and such. And concerning this he does two things: first, he deduces the reason as to food; second, as to clothing, at and about clothing. Concerning the first he does two things: first, he teaches us to reject solicitude by the animals’ example; second, because of its ineffectiveness, at but which of you by taking thought. Concerning the first he does four things: first, he has us consider brute animals; second, he points to the lack of worry among them; third, he points to divine providence; fourth, it is argued from these. Therefore, look, i.e., consider: ask the animals and they will teach you (Job 12:7). For from the consideration of these man learns sometimes: go to the ant . . . consider her ways and learn wisdom (Prov 6:6). For they do not sow.

625. Food is daily bread; its acquisition requires a threefold work: sowing, reaping, and storing. Hence he excludes these three things from the birds: they do not sow. But there is also the sowing of spiritual doctrine, as he says later: a sower went out to sow (Matt 13:3); and of good works: those who sow justice get a true reward (Prov 11:18); and of elements: who sows sparingly shall reap sparingly (2 Cor 9:6). And there is also an evil sowing: of carnal sins: who sows in his flesh reaps corruption from the flesh (Gal 6:8), and of spiritual sins: I have seen those who sow iniquity . . . reap the same (Job 4:8). But holy preachers reap when they carry people off to the faith.

Next, he mentions the help of divine providence: he says and your father, not their father, for God is properly the father of rational creatures, who are in his image (Gen 1:26). He also says heavenly, for we have something tying us to heaven, namely the soul, which belongs to it by likeness of substance. Hence your father feeds those things for which he is only God; how much more will he feed us, to whom he is Father: he gives the animals their food (Ps 147:9). Accordingly it is argued are you not more, that is, of greater value, by ordination, namely: let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea (Gen 1:26). For sometimes a horse is sold for more than a man, because the valuation of things is twofold: as to the order of nature, and in this way a man is the best of all things; or as to valuation or enjoyment, and in this way an animal is sometimes sold for more.

626. Concerning this text it should be considered that some people, and Origen, I believe, explain it in another way. And they say that by birds, the holy angels are meant, who exert no fleshly labors and nevertheless God feeds them spiritual food: about which the Psalm speaks: the bread of angels (Ps 78:25). But as Jerome says, this cannot stand, for the Lord added are you not worth more than they? But Hilary understands by birds the demons, and thus the birds of the air who are fed, inasmuch as they are preserved in the being of their nature, and men are more than they, for the Lord argues: if they who are predestined to death are sustained in being by God, how much more are we. But according to Augustine, what the Lord says is not to be taken allegorically, for the Lord wants to draw his argument from these sensible things to display his purpose.

But it should be known that here there was an error of certain people who said that it was not permitted to spiritual men to labor physically, because of the comparison to the birds. Against them, Augustine says in his book On the Work of Monks that it is impossible that men imitate this life in everything. Hence there were some perfect men who went into the desert and rarely went into the city: hence it was necessary that they gather much food. But the apostles, according to Augustine, worked with their hands. Hence not working does not belong to perfection. And Augustine gives the example that God delivers those who hope in him in tribulation, as is clear from Daniel and the youths in the furnace. Then should someone experiencing tribulations do nothing so that he might be delivered? The Lord said the contrary: If you are persecuted in one town, flee to another (Matt 10:23). And thus it should be said that the Lord wants man to do what he can in all situations, while hoping in God. God will give to him whatever he sees as expedient. For if he did otherwise he would be a tempter and stupid. Therefore God has providence over all deeds of men, so that he provides for each one according to his own manner, differently for birds than for men; for to birds he did not give reason by which to procure their needs; but all their outfitting is from nature. But to man he gave reason by which he may procure his necessities; hence by giving man reason, he gave him all things. And thus if we do what is in us, he will also do what is in him.

627. Which of you. He draws the argument from experience. For it is clear that as God provides for animals in the working of nature, so also for men. For in man there is a certain part which is subject to reason, like the motive and appetitive part; and a certain part which is not, like the nutritive and augmentative. But by these parts that are subject to reason man differs from the brutes, and thus he is provided for differently, for he provides for himself by reason, while they do through their nature. But as to those things in which he shares with the brutes, he is equally provided for in all things. For all things are increased by the working of nature, and since the increase of the body is from divine providence, we should not omit spiritual works in our slight solicitude for temporal goods. He made the little and the great, and he has equally care of all (Wis 6:8). And this is which of you.

Hilary explains the state of future resurrection and says that in the resurrection all are equal in quantity and thus to some, quantity will be added. And this is which of you by thinking can add to his stature? But Augustine disproves this in his book City of God, and I believe that he speaks better. For it is said: he will transform the body of our lowness, to conform it to the body of his glory (Phil 3:21). Therefore those things that appeared in the resurrected Christ and were manifested to his disciples, these we should hope for in ourselves. But Christ rose in the same quantity in which he was before: therefore nothing was added to him and nothing was subtracted from him, for the Lord says no hair of your head shall perish (Luke 21:18). Hence it should be said that in the resurrection all will be conformed to Christ as to age and each one will resurrect in the quantity that he would have had at that age; but what is from a defect of nature, as in dwarfs, will be taken away. Hence they will rise in whatever quantity they would have attained if nature had not failed, up to the age of Christ.

628. And for raiment. Here he draws out the argument as to clothing. And first he sets down what he intends; second, he draws a comparison: third, he argues from these. The second is at consider the lilies; the third, at for if the grass. Fittingly, after concern for food and drink, a comparison to clothing is treated, for as food and drink attain to the necessity of life, so also does clothing: if we have food and clothing, we will be content (1 Tim 6:8), and Jacob said, if God will give me bread to eat and clothing to wear . . . then the Lord shall be my God (Gen 28:20).

Consider the lilies. He brings up an example and proposes two things: a comparison and the help of a divine promise at But I say to you. He says consider. But the benefit of considering divine works is that the soul breaks forth into praise of the creator: I will meditate on all your works (Ps 77:12). How they grow: but God gave the growth (1 Cor 3:6). They neither labor. For clothing the work of men and women is necessary: and this is they neither labor nor spin, or they neither labor to dye it, nor spin to prepare it. Hence neither for the sake of the dyeing nor for the substance of the clothing do they labor.

629. But I say to you. Here is set down the benefit of the divine promise. For he so provides that all human diligence could not match it; for those things done by art cannot match those done by nature. And this is what is meant by not even Solomon, who was more glorious than all other kings known to the Jews (cf. 2 Chr 1:12). And he says in all, for not for one day was he able to have clothing like the flowers have. And this is the explanation of Chrysostom, and the literal sense. Another way, not even Solomon, for those corporeal things have clothing without worry, but not Solomon. Hilary says: anagogically, by the lily is meant the holy angels: my beloved is mine and I am his (Song 2:16). And the Lord wants to banish concern about the resurrection as to clothing in the resurrection: for as the angels are clothed with brightness, so will our bodies be clothed.

For if the grass. Here he argues from an example. Above the Lord made mention of lilies; here he changes to grass, for he intends to argue from the lesser thing. Hence he points out a defect on the part of one so that he can show the excellence in the other. Hence he shows the excellence as to the dignity of substance: for we are men, a flower is grass: the grass withers, the flower fades (Isa 40:7); as to duration, for we are perpetual as to our soul, a flower is almost momentary, for it is today, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven. And he uses the indeterminate future for the determinate future, as in Gen 30:33: my justice will answer for me tomorrow; or let them be like the grass on the rooftops (Ps 129:6). And the excellence of our end: for man was made for beatitude, but things like this come for man’s use: who makes grass grow on the mountains and herbs for the service of men (Ps 147:8).

Or then he said above lilies and afterward grass, because flowers are to the grass as clothing is to men. For the use of clothing is precisely to protect and ornament: and if God provides for lesser things to be ornamented, much more will he for the needs of greater things. And this is if the grass of the field. O you of little faith, who do not hope for lesser things from God, as later: you of little faith, why did you doubt? (Matt 14:31). But Hilary does not continue with what has just been said. But as he sees the lilies as the holy angels, so by the grass is understood unbelievers: and indeed the people are the grass (Isa 40:7). For if God provides for unbelievers, foreknown for punishment, how much more will he provide for us, foreknown for eternal life.

630. Be not solicitous therefore. Here he concludes the argument. And concerning this he does two things: first, he infers one conclusion; second, he reasons to the same conclusion in another way, at for after all these things the gentiles seek. He determines separately about the solicitude for food and drink and for clothing; here he concludes about both: at be not solicitous therefore. And those things which were said above should be recited, for solicitude of temporal things is forbidden as to four things: namely, that we do not place our end in them; that we do not seek them unnecessarily; that we do not occupy our minds too much with them; that we do not despair of the providence of God. Here certain other things are set down, and he sets down one other meaning.

Hence he says be not solicitous therefore; that is, when you live in some society, do not be solicitous to have something special as your food, drink, and clothing: be among them as one of them (Sir 32:1). For after all these things the gentiles seek, as though to say: the unbelievers should not do this. Hence unbelievers are reproached; but the gentiles are reproached with this. And first, he sets down the error of the unbelievers; second, he disproves it; third, he shows what should be done by the faithful. The second is at your Father knows; the third, at ask therefore. Therefore he says: I say that you should not worry about this, for you should not be conformed to this age (Rom 12:2).

For after all these things the gentiles seek. And this is for two reasons, according to which ‘seek’ can be taken in two ways: for it can convey the notion of the end in the beginning, and in this way the gentiles do not believe in eternal things, who seek after these things as their end; or if they do not seek them as their final end, nevertheless they seek them with all solicitude because they do not believe in divine providence or, as a result, in God: like the gentiles who do not know God (1 Thess 4:5).

Accordingly he brings up divine providence. And it should be known that providence presupposes two things: knowledge and will, and thus he shows both. For providence is nothing else than the ordering of things to an end, namely, having fixed on an end, to choose the ways to arrive at that end. Hence first it is necessary to know and will the end; second, to know the end in relation to those things that are for the end, as a builder knows the order of arranging the stones in a house. Hence for God to have providence about human things, it is required that he know and be familiar with them and that he will to direct them to the end. And thus he says for your father knows: all things were known to the Lord our God before they were created (Sir 23:20); all are naked and laid bare to the eyes of the one to whom we must render an account (Heb 4:13). Therefore your Father wishes to minister to you: your providence, O Father, governs (Wis 14:3). For he would not be father unless he were a provider, as below: if you who are evil know how to give your children good things (Matt 7:11).

Seek you therefore. Here he sets down three things. The kingdom, as end, because by the kingdom of God eternal beatitude is meant. For something is properly said to be ruled when it is subject to the rule of a governor. But in life these things are not completely subject to God, for we are not without sins; and these things will be in glory, where we will do the divine will perfectly: blessed is he who eats bread in the kingdom of God (Luke 14:15). The second is the right path: for in the kingdom the way is walked by justice. Hence if you want to go to the kingdom of God it is necessary that you keep the justice of the kingdom.

And he says justice, not simply but his justice, for justice is twofold, the justice of a man, by which he presumes by his own powers to be able to fulfill the commands of God; and the justice of God, for by the help of grace a man believes he can be saved: being ignorant of God’s justice (Rom 10:3). The third is that he states and all these things will be added unto you. A generous merchant after the market is over gives something and adds to it. We have agreed with God on the day’s wages, which is eternal life (Matt 20:13). Hence whatever is superadded to the total is something added and not part of the reckoning. And this is and all these things will be added unto you. He does not say ‘they will be given’: the Lord does not afflict the just with famine (Prov 10:3); give me only the food I need (Prov 30:8).

And note that to seek first is understood two ways: as an end or as a reward. And in this way he says seek first the kingdom of God, and not temporal things. For we must not preach the Gospel so that we can eat, but vice versa. Likewise, if you do not first seek the kingdom of God, you pervert the order.

And it should be known that the Lord teaches the same thing in the Lord’s prayer, where he lays down seven petitions. For first we should seek God’s good itself, namely, his glory; but in other things, first the kingdom of God; second, justice; third, thy will be done; fourth, those things that are added unto you, our daily bread.

Be not therefore. Here he forbids solicitude about future things. And first he sets down his own admonition; second, he explains it, at for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Therefore he says do not worry.

631. And note that the Lord does not forbid man from being solicitous about what to eat the next day: for he does not teach us to keep a greater perfection than the apostles kept. But he himself had a purse, as is said in John 12:6, about Judas who carried the Lord’s money. Hence he did not teach what he did not do, he who began to do and teach (Acts 1:1). And again, the apostles gathered provisions, as is said in Acts 11:28–30. And here four interpretations are given, of which the last is the most literal. The first is from Augustine, who says this: do not worry about tomorrow, that is, about temporal things. For tomorrow is said for the future in Scripture. But temporal things change through yesterday and tomorrow: we do not think about the things that are seen . . . which are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal(2 Cor 4:18). But these temporal things which pertain to time have their own solicitude attached. And therefore he says for tomorrow will bring worries of its own; sufficent to the day, i.e., to the present life, is the evil, i.e., the necessity by which we are forced to provide about temporal things. And it is called evil because it is derived from the fault of our first parents.

Chrysostom: things that are accumulated are always accumulated so that they will be enough for a long time. Hence do not worry about tomorrow, i.e., for accumulating unnecessary things. For tomorrow, i.e., the excess of temporal things, finds its own worry, for men are worried about how to seize these riches for themselves. Sufficient to the day, i.e., it is sufficient to receive necessities.

Hilary: in any action two things are to be considered, namely, the action itself, and the action’s result. For that a man sows, this is a certain action, but what he should find, that is a certain result. Therefore the Lord wants us not to worry about those things that are not in our control, and this is the more literal and subtle reading.

The fourth is also from Jerome, and it is straightforward. Do not worry, is not to be understood about future time, but he wants the concern that should burden the future not to be in the present; for at the time of the harvest harvesters are sought, and not at the time of grape-gathering, and vice versa. And this is consonant with the text: tomorrow, i.e., the future time, will have its own worries; sufficient to the day is the evil thereof, i.e., the pain, the affliction, as in Sirach 12:9: in times of affliction even one’s friends disappear.

End of the Sermon on the Mount

Against judgements

7:1 Do not judge, and you will not be judged; [n. 632]

7:2 for with what judgment you judge, you will be judged: and with what measure you measure out, it will be measured to you again. [n. 633]

7:3 And why do you see the mote that is in your brother’s eye; and do not see the beam that is in your own eye? [n. 636]

7:4 Or how do you say to your brother: let me cast the mote out of your eye; and behold a beam is in your own eye? [n. 636]

7:5 You hypocrite, first cast the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see to cast the mote out of your brother’s eye. [n. 638]

7:6 Do not give that which is holy to dogs; neither cast your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you. [n. 639]

7:7 Ask, and it will be given to you: seek, and you will find: knock, and it will be opened to you. [n. 640]

7:8 For everyone who asks, receives: and he who seeks, finds: and to him who knocks, it will be opened. [n. 643]

7:9 Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son will ask bread, he will give him a stone? [n. 645]

7:10 Or if he will ask him for a fish, will he give him a serpent? [n. 646]

7:11 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him? [n. 647]

7:12 All things therefore whatsoever that you would have men do to you, do also to them. For this is the law and the prophets. [n. 648]

7:13 Enter in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many there are who go in there. [n. 649]

7:14 How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leads to life: and few there are who find it! [n. 652]

632. He fulfilled the law as regards precepts and as regards promises, and now as regards judgments. First, therefore, he ordains that there be not rash judgment, and he says, do not judge, i.e., out of the bitterness of hatred; you have turned judgment into bitterness (Amos 6:13). Or in this way: do not judge as regards those things which are not entrusted to our judgment. Judgment is the Lord’s; he has charged us to judge about exterior things, but he has reserved the interior things for himself. Therefore do not judge about these things. Therefore do not judge before the time (1 Cor 4:5); the heart is perverse above all things, and unsearchable, who can know it? (Jer 17:9–10), for no one should judge about another that he is a bad man; for the doubtful things should be interpreted on the good side. Likewise, judgment should be fitting as regards the person of the one judging. Hence if you are in the same sin, or a greater, you should not judge; for wherein you judge another, you condemn yourself (Rom 2:1). Similarly, it is not forbidden to superiors, but to those who are subject; hence they should judge only those subject to them.

But Chrysostom says: do not judge, i.e., do not judge by avenging yourselves. Hence if you forgive, you will not be judged for that; rather, by reason of this mercy, you will obtain mercy.

633. There follows for with what judgment you judge, you will be judged, i.e., you will be judged for what judgment you judged. His sorrow will be turned on his own head (Ps 7:17). And below, all who take the sword will perish with the sword (Matt 26:52).

Or in this way: those who judge should fear, lest the Lord permit them to be punished with the same judgment, woe to you that spoil, will not you yourself also be spoiled? (Isa 33:1).

634. With what measure you measure out. Here he sets down the reason under a likeness of judgment. For the judge is like a living measuring rod: for when you wish to make two things equal, you refer them to a measuring rod, and you cut off from one whatever is in excess; thus if someone were to have more of another’s things than he should, the judge would cut it off, and return to each what is his own, i.e., it will be measured out to us according to this measure.

635. But it is objected: someone sins temporally, and hence is punished eternally; it seems that there is not an equal judgment.

I say that there are two things to be considered in a sin: duration and offense. And in offense there are two things to be considered, namely turning away and turning towards. On the part of turning towards a creature, the guilt is finite; on the part of turning away, it is infinite, because one turns away from God who is infinite. Therefore, since one turns himself away from the infinite, he should be punished infinitely.

Likewise, there are two things to be considered on the part of duration, namely the deed and the stain. The act is momentary, the stain infinite, i.e., eternal; therefore it should be punished infinitely, i.e., eternally. Hence if the demons could give up their stain, they could be freed from guilt and punishment. Likewise, on the part of the punishment there is the severity, and this is finite. Likewise the duration, and this is infinite.

636. And why do you see the mote that is in your brother’s eye; and do not see the beam that is in your own eye? Here he says that there should not be inordinate judgment; for it is inordinate when someone begins when he has not examined fully the case or the gravity of the offense. For two things are necessary in judging: knowledge of the case and judgment. About the first, the cause which I knew not, I searched out most diligently (Job 29:16). And why do you see the mote, a light sin, in your brother’s eye, i.e., in his conscience, and do not see the beam, i.e., a grave sin, in your own eye? By the beam and the mote he teaches us to consider the quantity of sins: for often those who commit grave sins reproach those who commit light sins, as happens in judging the pious, since men who commit grave sins, which they see as light, judge there to be grave sins in the pious; but these sins are swallowed up like one drop of water in a great quantity of wine.

Similarly, it happens that someone sins lightly out of weakness, and a judge, evil and badly disposed, who wishes to punish him out of hatred, attends to the mote in his eye and not to the beam in his own eye. How then, i.e., by what audacity can you say, let me cast the mote out of your eye? You should be ashamed. Chrysostom: with what spirit does a man love another more than himself? For if you correct him in the spirit of correction, first correct yourself; but you do this out of hatred, or for vainglory.

637. But it is asked whether one who is in mortal sin can correct another.

I say that either he was in sin at some time, or not: if he was never in sin, he should fear lest he fall, and therefore he should correct another reluctantly; if he was in sin at some time, he should reproach another with meekness. And perhaps the Lord permitted Peter to fall for this reason, he who was to be the pastor of the Church, so that he might bear himself more gently toward sinners. And Paul says about Christ, for we have not a high priest, who cannot have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin (Heb 4:15).

Now, if someone is subject to a sin, either it is a public sin, or a hidden one. If a hidden one, it is either out of weakness, since it displeases him that he sins, and thus he can reproach another, because what he reproaches in another, he reproaches in himself; if it is out of malice, he should never reproach another. But if it is a public sin, he should not accuse another with severity, but should meekly unite himself with that man. Hence one should not scold against sinners with harshness.

638. There follows you hypocrite, first cast the beam out of your own eye. The Lord begins by accusing, just as he does below against the wicked servant. Augustine: he shows that he means to blame the one who takes up an authority which is not his own. As it is written: but to the sinner God has said: why do you declare my justices, and take my covenant in your mouth? Seeing you have hated discipline (Ps 49:16–17). First, by fasting, praying, cast the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see the mote in your brother’s eye.

639. There follows do not give that which is holy to dogs, in which he shows that judgment should be discerning.

Therefore one should note what is signified by holy things, and what by pearls. Augustine: the holy things are the inviolate and unstained things to be safe-guarded; and the pearls are precious things which should not be despised. The dogs, which wound with their teeth, signify heretics; the pigs, which trample with their feet, signify the unclean. So to give holy things to the dogs is to supply holy things to heretics. Likewise, if something spiritual is said and it is despised, it is given to pigs.

Or, holy things signify the ecclesiastical sacraments; pearls, the mysteries of truth. The dog is an animal entirely unclean; the pig is partly unclean, partly not. The dogs signify infidels; the pigs signify those faithful who are evil. Do not give therefore that which is holy to dogs, i.e., do not give the sacraments to infidels. Pearls, i.e., the spiritual senses, should not be given to pigs; but the sensual man does not perceive these things that are of the Spirit of God (1 Cor 2:14), i.e., lest perhaps he should despise them. A soul that is full will tread upon the honeycomb (Prov 27:7). Hence turning to sin, they tear you, because they despise you, or bring in a false accusation.

But why? Did not Christ say many good things to infidels, and they rent asunder his words? I say that he did this for the sake of the good men who were with the evil men, who profited from it.

640. Ask, and it will be given to you. He gave his teaching, which is complete and perfect; here he teaches how it can be performed. And for this prayer and diligent attention are necessary.

First, then, he teaches us to pray;

second, he gives us an assurance of obtaining, there, or what man is there among you.

641. He says then, ask. And see that two false opinions are removed by this. The first is that of the proud, who think to fulfill the precepts by their own powers. But he says that it is necessary to ask it from God. Or what have you that you have not received? (1 Cor 4:7).

Likewise, he removes the opinion of many who say that God does not attend to prayers, and that they would not obtain if they were to ask; so he adds, and it will be given to you.

642. Similarly, he adds, seek, and you will find. And this is explained, first, by saying that nothing is added in these two phrases beyond what was said, but only the manner of asking is expressed. For anxious attention is required for asking, and likewise fervent devotion; and he implies these two things when he says, seek, i.e., pray. Or ask, just as he who seeks something places there his whole concentration. Hence to this pertains what the spouse says, I sought him whom my soul loves (Song 3:1). And you will find; one thing I have asked of the Lord, this will I seek after (Ps 26:4). Similarly, seek in the manner of one who knocks, because he who shouts at the door, if he is not heard, let him knock boldly. Come, my beloved, let us go out into the field, let us abide in the villages (Song 7:11).

Second, it is explained following Augustine, by referring to those things Christ said of himself: I am the way, and the truth, and the life (John 14:6): if you wish to travel on this way, ask of him, that he may direct your ways, saying with the Psalmist, show, O Lord, your ways to me, and teach me your paths (Ps 24:4). If you wish to know the truth, seek, and you will find; but it is not enough to be familiar with the path, and to seek the truth, unless we come to life, i.e., knock, that you may enter into it; hence, you will bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of your inheritance (Exod 15:17). But, according to the same Augustine, by far better, all these things are referred to the most urgent petition.

Likewise, in another way, it is explained by referring to diverse actions, ask by praying, seek by studying, knock by working.

643. For everyone who asks, receives.

Someone will say: you say that we should ask; I believe that this is said to holy men, but I am not of their number. This is why he says, everyone who asks, receives.

But it seems to be false, because it is written, now we know that God does not hear sinners (John 9:31).

And Augustine resolves this. If God does not hear sinners, how is it said of the publican that he said, O God, be merciful to me a sinner (Luke 18:13)? Hence he adds: he does not hear sinners, namely those who wish to remain in sins. But one should know that prayer is meritorious and impetratory, and it can be meritorious even if it is not impetratory.

644. But why does he say that everyone who asks, receives? It seems to be false, because what is asked is not always received.

I say that there are four cases in which a man asks and is not heard. For either he asks what is not expedient; you do not know what you ask (Matt 20:22); so one should ask for what is necessary for salvation. Likewise, second, because he does not ask well; you ask, and receive not; because you ask amiss (Jas 4:3); so one should ask piously, i.e., with faith. Again, one should ask humbly; hence, he has regarded the humility of his handmaid (Luke 1:48). Again, piously, i.e., devoutly. Likewise, sometimes he is not heard when he prays for another whose merits speak against the prayer; Moses and Samuel will stand before me, my soul is not towards this people (Jer 15:1). Likewise, he is not heard because he does not persevere; and he spoke also a parable to them, that we ought always to pray (Luke 18:1), and perseveringly, because the Lord desires that the desire should grow. Likewise it happens that the Lord hears, but it is not seen, because the Lord gives what is useful, and not what is desired, as happened to Paul. Augustine: the Lord is good, who often does not give what we ask, that he may give what we would prefer: and because we ourselves call him ‘Father,’ he gives us what a father would give to a son.

645. For this reason he adds next, or what man is there among you, of whom if his son will ask bread, he will give him a stone? By bread is understood Christ; I am the living bread which came down from heaven (John 6:51). Likewise, the bread is sacred doctrine; with the bread of life and understanding, she will feed him (Sir 15:3). Likewise, charity; and the bread of the corn of the land will be most plentiful, and fat (Isa 30:23).

On the other hand, the stone is the devil; his heart will be as hard as a stone (Job 41:15). Similarly, the stone names hardness; hence it is said: I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and will give you a heart of flesh (Ezek 36:26). It also names false teaching; the stone also that is in the dark and the shadow of death the flood divides (Job 28:3). Hence if someone asks God, as a Father, for bread, i.e., Christ, he will not give him the devil.

646. Similarly, or if he will ask him for a fish. A fish lives in the water, and is understanding in dogmas; he that will drink of the water that I will give him, will not thirst for ever (John 4:13). And in the same passage, but the water that I will give him, will become in him a fountain of water, springing up into life everlasting.

Likewise, by water are understood afflictions. Hence by fish are understood those living in the waters of afflictions. Or the fish name the faith, which hides under water, i.e., under the protection of the spirit; but by the serpent is understood the false doctrines of the heretics.

He says then, or if he will ask him for a fish, will he give him a serpent? The other Evangelist sets down a third, namely an egg (Luke 11:12). In this way, by bread is understood charity, by fish is understood faith, and by the egg, hope.

647. He brings in, if you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to them who ask him?

But someone will say: he said this to the apostles, who were not evil.

And Chrysostom resolves it: indeed they were, in comparison to the divine goodness. As it is written: all our justices as the rag of a menstruous woman (Isa 64:6). Jerome says: even if not all are evil according to deed, yet all are evil according to an inclination to evil. Hence it is said, and God seeing that the wickedness of men was great on the earth, and that all the thought of their heart was bent upon evil at all times (Gen 6:5). And, behold every one of you walks after the perverseness of his evil heart (Jer 16:12).

Augustine: if you then, being evil; he does not say, you are evil, but being evil, you would give to temporal children the temporal goods which you reckon as good; much more then your Father, who is good in the highest way.

648. And this is what follows, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him if you wish to receive? All things therefore whatsoever that you would have men do to you, do also to them; i.e., give to others, if you wish that something be given to you. Some men set here all good things, but it is not necessary, since he says, you would. Now, will is of good things, and cupidity of bad; therefore it is not necessary to add good things. Hence that which you will to be done for you, do for others. For this is the law and the prophets; and he does not say the whole of the law and the prophets, as in the first precept, on these two commandments depends the whole law and the prophets (Matt 22:40).

649. Enter in at the narrow gate. Lest perhaps someone should think that because he had said, ask, and it will be given to you, that a man would get everything from God without good works, he teaches that this also comes about through good works.

First, therefore, he sets down a warning;

second, the reason.

650. He says then, enter in, i.e., make an effort at entering in.

Augustine explains this in two ways. Christ is the gate; I am the door (John 10:9), because without him no one comes to the kingdom. This gate is narrow through humility, because he humbled himself even unto death. Hence, a short word will the Lord make upon the earth (Isa 10:23). Hence, enter in at the narrow gate, i.e., by the humility of Christ. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and so to enter into his glory? (Luke 24:26). And so it is necessary for us. Hence, through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God (Acts 14:21).

Similarly, this gate is called charity; this is the gate of the Lord, the just will enter into it (Ps 117:20). This is the narrow divine law; and through this we should enter by keeping the law and the precepts.

651. Then he gives the reason: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leads to destruction. And he describes two gates, one wide, another narrow.

It is described as wide because the devil is wide, wide by the presumption of pride; and the gates of hell will not prevail against it (Matt 16:18).

This gate is wide, because that which receives all is wide; for there is nothing which would fill it. Likewise, this gate names iniquity or vice; and this is wide, because it happens in many ways. For virtue is said in one way, but vice in many ways; cursing, and lying, and killing, and theft, and adultery have overflowed, and blood has touched blood (Hos 4:2). Likewise, there is the wide way, and this is the work of sin; and now what have you to do in the way of Egypt? (Jer 2:18). Similarly, this way is the spacious one, because it seems to be wide in its beginning, but afterward it is narrow, because its outlet is into perdition, because the wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23).

And many there are who go in there. Here he touches upon the number, because literally, the number of fools is infinite (Sir 1:15).

652. How narrow is the gate, and straight is the way that leads to life. This is contrary to what precedes it. And this is narrow, because it is narrowed according to the rule of the law, and it is a way against the other way; for the Lord knows the ways that are on the right hand: but those are perverse which are on the left hand (Prov 4:27).

But one might ask why the way of charity is narrow, for it seems that it would be wide; I will lead you by the paths of equity: which when you will have entered, your steps will not be straitened (Prov 4:11–12). But the way of sin is a narrow way; hence, we wearied ourselves in the way of iniquity and destruction, and have walked through hard ways (Wis 5:7).

One should say that it is the way of the body and of the reason. The way of charity in the way of the flesh is a narrow way, while the way of charity in the way of reason is the other way around. And an example can be found in a teacher, for the more he loves a child, the more he restricts his steps. Hence the way of charity in the way of the flesh is tightened, while the way of charity in the way of reason is the other way around. Pierce my flesh with your fear (Ps 118:120).

653. And few there are who find it! Here he mentions that the discovery of the way of the spirit is difficult and rare, but not the discovery of the way of the flesh. And there is a reason: because the way of the flesh is pleasure, and this is ready at hand; but the way of the spirit is hidden. Hence, O how great is the multitude of your sweetness, O Lord, which you have hidden for those who fear you! (Ps 30:20). For since it is hidden, few there are who find it! But some also find it, and fall back, of whom it is said, no man putting his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God (Luke 9:62).

False prophets

7:15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly are ravening wolves. [n. 655]

7:16 By their fruits you will know them. Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? [n. 658]

7:17 Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit, and the evil tree brings forth evil fruit. [n. 661]

7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. [n. 661]

7:19 Every tree that does not bring forth good fruit, will be cut down, and will be cast into the fire. [n. 662]

7:20 Wherefore by their fruits you will know them. [n. 662]

7:21 Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven, he will enter into the kingdom of heaven. [n. 663]

7:22 Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name, and cast out devils in your name, and done many miracles in your name? [n. 666]

7:23 And then will I profess to them, I never knew you: depart from me, you who work iniquity. [n. 667]

7:24 Everyone therefore who hears these my words, and does them, will be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, [n. 670]

7:25 and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it did not fall, for it was founded on a rock. [n. 672]

7:26 And everyone who hears these my words, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand, [n. 673]

7:27 and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it. [n. 673]

7:28 And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words, that the people were in admiration at his doctrine. [n. 677]

7:29 For he was teaching them as one having power, and not as the scribes and Pharisees. [678]

654. He teaches caution, whom we should avoid. Moreover, they are described by profession, for they are prophets.

But one can ask of which prophets he speaks, for all the prophets and the law prophesied until John (Matt 11:13); hence in that time there were no prophets of Christ, because they are ended in him.

Therefore one should say that the prophets are teachers and superiors in the Church.

655. But why does he mean by false?

They are called false who are not sent. About such men it is said, I did not send prophets, yet they ran (Jer 23:21). Likewise, they are called false who speak lies; hence, the prophets prophesied in Baal (Jer 2:8). Thus there were also false prophets among the people (2 Pet 2:1), just as there were many lying teachers among us.

Beware, i.e., be diligently aware, because they are hidden, and one should beware a hidden trap. Hence their malice is hidden within.

656. He says then, who come to you in the clothing of sheep. Sheep are the faithful: we are his people and the sheep of his pasture (Ps 99:3). And their clothing is fasting and almsgiving, by which they hide themselves. Having an appearance indeed of godliness, but denying the power thereof (2 Tim 3:5).

But one should know that if wolves were to hide themselves in sheepskins, still the sheep would not lose its skin on this account; in this way, although these evil ones are hidden by good works, nevertheless they do much good.

657. But inwardly are ravening wolves. This is principally explained as about heretics, afterward as about evil leaders. Hence it is found in a commentary on John, I am the good shepherd (John 10:11): it is said that one man is a shepherd, who governs and rules; another man a wolf, who aims at mischief; another man a hired hand, who seeks his own profit. Hence the shepherd is to be loved, the wolf to be fled, the hired man to be tolerated.

Therefore, when he says inwardly are ravening wolves, it is understood as about those who have the intention of corrupting the common people, and they should be called wolves. Likewise the hired men, that is, the bad Christians, who spread a bad example, who live a bad life, have the manner of a wolf as regards effect; I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock (Acts 20:29). And he says, inwardly, because they have the evil intention of killing the people.

658. By their fruits you will know them. By their fruits, i.e., by their works.

But this seems contrary to what was said before, because they have sheep’s clothing, and the clothing is works. Therefore they will not be known by them. Chrysostom: the fruit is the confession of faith. Hence if he confesses the faith, he is not a heretic. For the fruit of the light is in all goodness, and justice, and truth (Eph 5:9).

And if it is explained as about pretenders, then it is explained in this way, that by clothing is understood exterior works. Hence, but the fruit of the Spirit is charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity (Gal 5:22–23).

659. But you ask: how can they be known?

One should say that it is hardly possible for a hypocrite to be so put together that he is not noticed as something evil, either by word or by deed. As the faces of them that look therein, shine in the water, so the hearts of men are laid open to the wise (Prov 27:19). And Seneca: no man can carry a made-up persona for a long time.