Midfeast of Pentecost

Doctrine that is of God, then, is one thing; doctrine that is human is another. So when the Jews, regarding him as man, called into question his teaching and said, "How does this man have such learning when he has never been taught?" Jesus answered and said, "My teaching is not mine." For in teaching without elegance of letters, he seems to teach not as [a] man but rather as God who, instead of learning his doctrine, originated it. For he has found and devised the entire way of discipline, as we have read above, inasmuch as of the Son of God it has been said, "This is our God; no other can be compared with him. He has uncovered the whole way of knowledge and shown it to his servant Jacob and to Israel, whom he loved. Only then did [Wisdom] appear on earth and live among human beings." How, then, could he, as divine, not have his own doctrine—he who has found the entire way of discipline before he was even seen on earth?

How then did the Lord answer those that were marvelling how He knew letters which He had not learned? "My doctrine," saith He, "is not mine, but His that sent me." This is the first profundity. For He seems as if in a few words He had spoken contraries. For He says not, This doctrine is not mine; but, "My doctrine is not mine." If not Thine, how Thine? If Thine, how not Thine? For Thou sayest both: both, "my doctrine;" and, "not mine." For if He had said, This doctrine is not mine, there would have been no question. But now, brethren, in the first place, consider well the question, and so in due order expect the solution. For he who sees not the question proposed, how can he understand what is expounded? The subject of inquiry, then, is that which He says, "My, not mine" this appears to be contrary; how "my," how "not mine"? If we carefully look at what the holy evangelist himself says in the beginning of his Gospel, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;" thence hangs the solution of this question. What then is the doctrine of the Father, but the Father's Word? Therefore, Christ Himself is the doctrine of the Father, if He is the Word of the Father. But since the Word cannot be of none, but of some one, He said both "His doctrine," namely, Himself, and also, "not His own," because He is the Word of the Father. For what is so much "Thine" as Thyself? And what so much not Thine as Thyself, if that Thou art is of another?

The Word then is God; and it is also the Word of a stable, unchangeable doctrine, not such as can be sounded by syllables and fleeting, but abiding with the Father, to which abiding doctrine let us be converted, being admonished by the transitory sounds of the voice. For that which is transitory does not so admonish us as to call us to transitory things. We are admonished to love God. All this that I have said were syllables; they smote through the air to reach your sense of hearing, and by sounding passed away: that, however, which I advise you ought not so to pass away, because He whom I exhort you to love passes not away; and when you, exhorted in transient syllables, shall have been converted, you shall not pass away, but shall abide with Him who is abiding. There is therefore in the doctrine this great matter, this deep and eternal thing which is permanent: whither all things that pass away in time call us, when they mean well and are not falsely put forward. For, in fact, all the signs which we produce by sounds do signify something which is not sound. For God is not the two short syllables "Deus," and it is not the two short syllables that we worship, and it is not the two short syllables that we adore, nor is it to the two short syllables that we desire to come-two syllables which almost cease to sound before they have begun to sound; nor in sounding them is there room for the second until the first has passed away. There remains, then, something great which is called "God," although the sound does not remain when we say the word "God." Thus direct your thoughts to the doctrine of Christ, and ye shall arrive at the Word of God; and when you have arrived at the Word of God, consider this, "The Word was God," and you will see that it was said truly, "my doctrine:" consider also whose the Word is, and you will see that it was rightly said, "is not mine."

Therefore, to speak briefly, beloved, it seems to me that the Lord Jesus Christ said, "My doctrine is not mine," meaning the same thing as if He said, "I am not from myself." For although we say and believe that the Son is equal to the Father, and that there is not any diversity of nature and substance in them, that there has not intervened any interval of time between Him that begets and Him that is begotten, nevertheless we say these things, while keeping and guarding this, that the one is the Father, the other the Son. But Father He is not if He have not a Son, and Son He is not if He have not a Father: but yet the Son is God from the Father; and the Father is God, but not from the Son. The Father of the Son, not God from the Son: but the other is Son of the Father, and God from the Father. For the Lord Christ is called Light from Light. The Light then which is not from Light, and the equal Light which is not from Light, are together one Light not two Lights.

If we have understood this, thanks be to God; but if any has not sufficiently understood, man has done as far as he could: as for the rest, let him see whence he may hope to understand. As laborers outside, we can plant and water; but it is of God to give the increase. "My doctrine," saith He, "is not mine, but His that sent me." Let him who says he has not yet understood hear counsel. For since it was a great and profound matter that had been spoken, the Lord Christ Himself did certainly see that all would not understand this so profound a matter, and He gave counsel in the sequel. Dost thou wish to understand? Believe. For God has said by the prophet: "Except ye believe, ye shall not understand." To the same purpose what the Lord here also added as He went on "If any man is willing to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak from myself." What is the meaning of this, "If any man be willing to do His will"? But I had said, if any man believe; and I gave this counsel: If thou hast not understood, said I, believe. For understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore do not seek to understand in order to believe, but believe that thou mayest understand; since, "except ye believe, ye shall not understand." Therefore when I would counsel the obedience of believing toward the possibility of understanding, and say that our Lord Jesus Christ has added this very thing in the following sentence, we find Him to have said, "If any man be willing to do His will, he shall know of the doctrine." What is "he shall know"? It is the same thing as "he shall understand." But what is "If any man be willing to do His will"? It is the same thing as to believe. All men indeed perceive that "shall know" is the same thing as "shall understand:" but that the saying, "If any man be willing to do His will," refers to believing, all do not perceive; to perceive this more accurately, we need the Lord Himself for expounder, to show us whether the doing of the Father's will does in reality refer to believing. But who does not know that this is to do the will of God, to work the work of God; that is, to work that work which is pleasing to Him? But the Lord Himself says openly in another place: "This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him whom He has sent." "That ye believe on Him," not, that ye believe Him. But if ye believe on Him, ye believe Him; yet he that believes Him does not necessarily believe on Him. For even the devils believed Him, but they did not believe on Him. Again, moreover, of His apostles we can say, we believe Paul; but not, we believe on Paul: we believe Peter; but not, we believe on Peter. For, "to him that believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted unto him for righteousness." What then is "to believe on Him"? By believing to love Him, by believing to esteem highly, by believing to go into Him and to be incorporated in His members. It is faith itself then that God exacts from us: and He finds not that which He exacts, unless He has bestowed what He may find. What faith, but that which the apostle has most amply defined in another place, saying, "Neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith that worketh by love?" Not any faith of what kind soever, but "faith that worketh by love:" let this faith be in thee, and thou shalt understand concerning the doctrine. What indeed shalt thou understand? That "this doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me;" that is, thou shalt understand that Christ the Son of God, who is the doctrine of the Father, is not from Himself, but is the Son of the Father.

This sentence overthrows the Sabellian heresy. The Sabellians have dared to affirm that the Son is the very same as He who is also the Father: that the names are two, but the reality one. If the names were two and reality one, it would not be said, "My doctrine is not mine." Anyhow, if Thy doctrine is not Thine, O Lord, whose is it, unless there be another whose it is? The Sabellians understand not what Thou saidst; for they see not the trinity, but follow the error of their own heart. Let us worshippers of the trinity and unity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and one God, understand concerning Christ's doctrine, how it is not His. And He said that He spoke not from Himself for this reason, because Christ is the Son of the Father, and the Father is the Father of Christ; and the Son is from God the Father, God, but God the Father is God not from God the Son.

(Tract. xxix. s. 3) Mine is not mine, appears a contradiction; why did He not say, This doctrine is not Mine? Because the doctrine of the Father being the Word of the Father, and Christ Himself being that Word, Christ Himself is the doctrine of the Father. And therefore He calls the doctrine both His own, and the Father's. A word must be a word of some one's. What is so much Thine as Thou, and what is so much not Thine as Thou, if what Thou art, Thou art of another. His saying then, My doctrine is not Mine own, seems briefly to express the truth, that He is not from Himself; it refutes the Sabellian heresy, which dares to assert that the Son is the same as the Father, there being only two names for one thing.

(de Trin. i. c. xi) Or thus: In one sense He calls it His, in another sense not His; according to the form of the Godhead His, according to the form of the servant not His.

(Tract. xxix. s. 6) Should any one however not understand this, let him hear the advice which immediately follows from our Lord: If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of Myself. What meaneth this, If any man will do His will? To do His will is to believe on Him, as He Himself says, This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him whom He hath sent. (c. 6:29) And who does not know, that to work the work of God, is to do His will? To know is to understand. Do not then seek to understand in order to believe, but believe in order to understand, for, Except ye believe, ye shall not understand. (Is. 7:9. Vulg.)

"Jesus answered them." Christ's response, by which he satisfies their amazement, showing that he does not have knowledge through acquisition, as other men have, but from his origin. On account of which he says: "My doctrine," namely that which I teach, "is not mine," that is, not from me, or for my glory, or acquired by me, "but his who sent me," that is, from the Father, who sent me. For all things which the Son has, he receives from the Father: above in chapter five: "I cannot do anything of myself," and so neither can I teach anything.

It is asked concerning what he says: "My teaching is not my own:" Because thus it is removed from himself, and therefore it seems false. Likewise, how does this satisfy the Jews? Because similarly I could say the same thing, that my teaching is not from me but from God, since "all wisdom is from the Lord God."

Chrysostom responds that he says his teaching was not devised by himself, but is from the Father; whence the sense is: my teaching, namely that which I teach, is not my own, but is from the Father.

And in this he answers their question, by sending them to the Father, and calms their fury through humility; whence the teaching was his own, because he is wisdom itself by essence; but he said it was not his own, because he received it from another.

But why did he not simply say: I am wisdom itself, but rather humbled himself? Chrysostom assigns five reasons: the first, to show that he is from another and is the Son, not unbegotten. The second, to show that he is not contrary to God, as the Antichrist will be, who "will exalt himself above all that is called God." Third, to show that he is a true man. Fourth, on account of the weakness of the hearers. Fifth, to teach humility, according to that passage in Romans 11: "Be not highminded."

Otherwise it is answered that this contradiction is resolved according to the rule of Augustine, by looking to the twofold nature, so that the sense is: my doctrine according to the Divinity is not mine according to the humanity. That is called "ours" which has been acquired by us, and thus it satisfies the question.

In the third way, emphasis is placed on that which is "mine;" "mine" signifies the freedom of possessing and the principle of producing, as "my field, my book," which I made. But this can be said in two ways: either absolutely or distinctively, just as both "of me" and "to me." Speaking absolutely, therefore, that doctrine was Christ's, who freely possessed it, and from him it flowed forth to the hearers. But it was not distinctively Christ's alone, because this same doctrine was also the Father's, and also this same doctrine was from the Father.

Or I answer otherwise: there is a threefold "mine": "mine" according to nature or origin, "mine" according to the divine nature or the human, "mine" absolutely or distinctively.

For of the prophets it is said, "We have all received of His fulness," that is, of Christ's. So that the prophets are not thieves. "And my doctrine is not Mine," saith the Lord, "but the Father's which sent me." And of those who steal He says: "But he that speaketh of himself, seeketh his own glory." Such are the Greeks, "lovers of their own selves, and boasters." Scripture, when it speaks of these as wise, does not brand those who are really wise, but those who are wise in appearance.

We shall find that indeed true that is written by one of the wise men, The Spirit of the Lord hath filled the world, and the ear of hearing heareth all things. But to those who of utter folly, yea rather of blasphemy, suppose that ought they utter will escape the Divine Mind, the Godlike Psalmist says, Understand, ye brutish among the people, and ye fools, when will ye be wise? He that planted the ear, heareth He not? for how could it possibly happen that He should not surely hear all things, who implanteth the sense of hearing into them that were made by Him?

See therefore in this too again that the Lord is by Nature God. For the secret whispers of the Jews in the crowd He is not ignorant of; He receives them into His Ears in God-befitting way, albeit from fear of the rulers they say nothing openly concerning Him. And when on one occasion certain of those who had rushed together into the temple, marvelled and were reasoning (as is like) or gently saying one to another, How knoweth This Man letters not having learned? needs does He again show Himself Equal to God the Father Who learneth nothing at all, but hath the knowledge of all things by Nature and without learning, because He surpasseth all understanding and soareth above all wisdom that is in things that are. It was then possible for Him from other things too, to show and to assure His hearers, that whatsoever things are in the Father, these also are in Him, by reason of Identity of Nature: which thing also He used to do in other things also, from being able to do the same things and having like Operation unto all things, mounting up unto Equal Dignity: for what things soever the Father doeth, these (He saith) doth the Son too likewise, and again, For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, so the Son too quickeneth whom He will.

But here it was (I suppose) seasonable and most suitable, to make a demonstration of the most necessary points. For His discourse about wisdom and learning without letters was made with those who had been considering these things. It behoved Him then to show that this existed in Him, just as in the Father. What then is the mode of proof? From His having Equality of wisdom with Him, even though according to true and wise reasoning, He most surely is Himself Wisdom and of God the Father, to Whom in all things like, He says He teaches the same things with Him, without any distinction. For either on account of the exact likeness of His doctrine to that of the Father, does He say that it is the Father's, or because He is Himself the Wisdom of the Father, through Which He speaketh and ordereth all things, does He say that the doctrine too is His: yet something else besides doth He dispense, contributing not slightly to the salvation of His pupils. For since they seeing a Man, on account of the flesh which was of earth received not the word as being of God, and therefore seemed to be sick of a plausible unbelief, profitably doth He attribute the teaching to God the Father, yet saying what was true, and from fear of their being fighters against God, if they held out any longer against the decrees from above, persuading them to receive His words.

But we must know that by His saying again that He was sent, He does not show that He is second in Dignity to the Father. For we must not imagine a mission befitting a servant, even though because clad in servant's form He might rightly say even this of Himself. But He was sent as Word from Mind, as the Sun's radiance from itself. For these I suppose are processions from those things in which they are, from their appearing to issue forth, yet exist they naturally and immovably in those things whence they are. For we ought not, because word issues forth from mind, and radiance from the sun, therefore at all to suppose that the things which produced are left of those which have gone forth of them, but rather we shall see both those in these, and these again existing in the former. For mind will never be word-less, nor yet word again without the mind fashioned therein. Analogously to this, shall we conceive of the other also.

Jesus says that his teaching belongs to God the Father either because Jesus' teaching is exactly like that of God the Father or because Jesus himself is the wisdom of the Father, through which the Father speaks and orders all things.

"My doctrine is not Mine." Again He answereth to their secret thoughts, referring them to the Father, and so desiring to stop their mouths.

But how is the doctrine His and not His? For He said not, "This doctrine is not Mine"; but having first said, "it is Mine," and having claimed it as His own, He then added, "it is not Mine." How then can the same thing be both "His" and not "His"? It is "His," because He spake it not as one who had been taught; and it is "not His," because it was the doctrine of the Father. How then saith He, "All that is the Father's is Mine, and Mine His"? (c. xvii. 10.) "For if because the doctrine is the Father's, it is not thine, that other assertion is false, for according to that it ought to be thine." But the "is not Mine," affords a strong proof that His doctrine and the Father's are one; as if He had said, "It hath nothing different, as though it were another's. For though My Person be different, yet so do I speak and do as not to be supposed to speak or do anything contrary to the Father, but rather the very same things that the Father saith and doeth."

Although it would have been better for them to conclude from this that there was nothing merely human in Him, since they did not wish to acknowledge this, He Himself answers them and teaches that His teaching is from the Father and God. "Nothing is Mine," He says. "Of Myself, contrary to God, I say nothing, but what belongs to the Father, that is what I speak."

Having been told of the place and opportunity which Christ had to reveal the origin of his spiritual teaching, we now see the origin of this teaching. First, he shows them that God is the source of this spiritual teaching; secondly, he invites them to accept it (v 37). As to the first, he does two things. First, he shows the origin of this teaching; secondly, the origin of the one teaching it (v 25). He does two things about the first. First, he shows the origin of this teaching; secondly, he answers an objection (v 19). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he shows the origin of this teaching; secondly, he proves that it comes from God (v 17).

He says, Jesus answered and said. As if to say: You are wondering where I gained my knowledge; but I say, My doctrine is not mine. If he had said: "The doctrine that I am presenting to you is not mine," there would be no problem. But he says: My doctrine is not mine; and this seems to be a contradiction. However, this can be explained, for this statement can be understood in several ways. Our Lord's doctrine can in some sense be called his own, and in some sense not his own. First, we can understand Christ as the Son of God. Then, since the doctrine of anyone is nothing else than his word, and the Son of God is the Word of God, it follows that the doctrine of the Father is the Son himself. But this same Word belongs to himself through an identity of substance. "What does belong to you, if not you yourself?" However, he does not belong to himself through his origin. As Augustine says: "If you do not belong to yourself (because you are from another), what does?" This seems to be the meaning, expressed in summary fashion, of: My doctrine is not mine. As if to say: I am not of myself. This refutes the Sabellian heresy, which dared to say that the Son is the Father.

Or, we could understand it as meaning that My doctrine, which I proclaim with created words, is not mine, but his who sent me, i.e., it is the Father's; that is, my doctrine is not mine as from myself, but it is from the Father: because the Son has even his knowledge from the Father through an eternal generation. "All things have been given to me by my Father" (Mt 11:27).

Secondly, we can understand Christ as the Son of Man. Then he is saying: My doctrine, which I have in my created soul, and which my lips proclaim, is not mine, i.e., it is not mine as from myself, but from God: because every truth, by whomever spoken, is from the Holy Spirit.

Thus, as Augustine says in The Trinity (Bk 1), our Lord called this doctrine his own from one point of view, and not his own from another point of view. According to his form of God, it was his own; but according to his form of a servant, it was not his own. This is an example for us, that we should realize that all our knowledge is from God, and thank him for it: "What do you have which you have not been given? And if you have been given it, why do you glory as if you have not been given it?" (1 Cor 4:7).

And because this response was not manifest except to those who hear rightly — and these are those who hear in order to act — for this reason he says: "If anyone wills to do his will," namely of God the Father, "he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God, or whether I speak of myself;" because otherwise he cannot truly know either me or my doctrine. Therefore it is said in 1 John 2: "He who says that he knows God and does not keep his commandments is a liar." And thus it is commendable from its origin, and it is also commendable from its end, in this, that in teaching he does not seek his own glory.

You discount them in order to think more accurately. But you can't think at all — and therefore, of course, can't think accurately — if you have nothing to think about. A physiologist, for example, can study pain and find out that it 'is' (whatever is means) such and such neural events. But the word pain would have no meaning for him unless he had 'been inside' by actually suffering. If he had never looked along pain he simply wouldn't know what he was looking at. The very subject for his inquiries from outside exists for him only because he has, at least once, been inside.

This case is not likely to occur, because every man has felt pain. But it is perfectly easy to go on all your life giving explanations of religion, love, morality, honour, and the like, without having been inside any of them. And if you do that, you are simply playing with counters. You go on explaining a thing without knowing what it is. That is why a great deal of contemporary thought is, strictly speaking, thought about nothing — all the apparatus of thought busily working in a vacuum.

One speaks in one way of the truth, in another way the truth interprets itself. The guessing at truth is one thing, and truth itself is another. Resemblance is one thing, the thing itself is another. And the one results from learning and practice, the other from power and faith. For the teaching of piety is a gift, but faith is grace. "For by doing the will of God we know the will of God." "Open, then," says the Scripture, "the gates of righteousness; and I will enter in, and confess to the Lord." But the paths to righteousness (since God saves in many ways, for He is good) are many and various, and lead to the Lord's way and gate. And if you ask the royal and true entrance, you will hear, "This is the gate of the Lord, the righteous shall enter in by it." While there are many gates open, that in righteousness is in Christ, by which all the blessed enter, and direct their steps in the sanctity of knowledge.

We ought uncritically and without all doubt to receive the words of the Truth, and to believe that a thing once said, cannot be otherwise than as it was declared to be. But He permits not His saying to be without proof, on account of the unbelievers, but introduces a most evident and exceeding clear solution, tempering with much skill the fashion of His words. And what the skill is, what the order of the economy, we will again say. They were seeking to kill Him on account of the paralytic, him (I mean) that was healed on the sabbath day. Gently then does He alike scare them from their dreadful purpose against Him, and clearly does He convict those who are travailing with their blood-thirsty purpose against Him, that they were choosing to fulfil their own lust rather than the will of the Law-giver. For then (saith He) shall ye know perfectly of My doctrine, that it is of God the Father, when ye shall choose to follow His Will rather than your own. But the Will of the Law-giver and of God, is to abstain wholly from murder. Then, then (He saith) shall ye, not holden beforehand by unjust hatred, nor thrust forth in brutish guise to no seasonable anger, know clearly, whether the word of My teaching is of God, or whether I am speaking of Myself. Having therefore interwoven reproof with profit, He with justice accuses them, for that they unreasonably mock at what He teaches, though God the Father consenteth and co-willeth, or what also is true, co-teacheth and co-interpreteth. But He puts Of Myself, for, Privately and wholly severed from being after the Co-Will and Purpose of the Father. And I do not suppose any person of sound mind will think that He accuses His own words of being spurious, but says that they will never be otherwise than in accordance with the Will of God the Father. For He speaks by His own Word and Wisdom, His Own Offspring; but That speaks not at all diversely from Himself, for how could It?

He tells them, You will fully know that "my doctrine" comes from God the Father when you choose to follow his will rather than your own.… He justly accuses them because they unreasonably mock what he teaches, even though God the Father consents and agrees with what he is teaching, and (what is also true) even co-teaches and co-interprets [with Jesus] … No person of sound mind would ever think that Jesus here casts aspersions on his own words. Rather, he is saying that his words will never be anything other than in agreement with the will of God the Father. For the Father speaks by his own Word and Wisdom and offspring. But that [offspring] in no way speaks differently from the [Father]. How could it?

"If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of Myself." What He saith is this, "Cast out from yourselves the malice and wrath and envy and hatred which has without cause been conceived against Me, then there is nothing to hinder you from knowing that My words are indeed the words of God. For at present these things cast a darkness over you, and destroy the light of right judgment, while if ye remove them this shall no longer be your case." Yet He spake not (plainly) thus, (for so He would have confounded them exceedingly,) but implied it all by saying, "He that doeth His will shall know of the doctrine, whether it is of God, or whether I speak of Myself"; that is, "whether I speak anything different and strange and contrary to God." For, "of Myself" is always put with this meaning, that "I say nothing except what seemeth good to Him, but all that the Father willeth, I will also."

"If any man do His will, he shall know of the doctrine." What meaneth, "If any man do His will?" "If any man be a lover of the life which is according to virtue, he shall know the power of the sayings." "If any man will give heed to the prophecies, to see whether I speak according to them or not."

Having said that My teaching is not Mine, that is, not contrary to God, but the teaching of My Father, He says that whoever does the will of God, that is, whoever makes himself at home with virtue and is not a slave to envy and is not darkened by groundless hatred against Me, that person will know the power of My words — whether I speak from the Father, or something foreign and contrary to Him. He who does the will of God is the one who delves into the Scriptures and the prophets. Such a person can learn concerning the Lord's teaching that it is from God. For the prophets portray the Lord not as an opponent of God who speaks of Himself, but as One who speaks and does all such things as are pleasing to God.

Then he proves that his doctrine is from God. And he does this in two ways: first, from the judgment of those who correctly understand such matters; and secondly, from his own intention (v 18).

With respect to the first, we should note that when there is a question whether someone is performing well in some art, this is decided by one who has experience in that art; just as the question whether someone is speaking French well should be decided by one who is well versed in the French language. With this in mind, our Lord is saying: The question whether my doctrine is from God must be decided by one who has experience in divine matters, for such a person can judge correctly about these things. "The sensual man does not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God. The spiritual man judges all things" (1 Cor 2:14). Accordingly, he is saying: Because you are alienated from God, you do not know whether a doctrine is from God. If anyone wants to do his will, that is, the will of God, he can know whether this doctrine is from God, or whether I am speaking on my own (a meipso). Indeed, one who is speaking what is false is speaking on his own, because "When he lies, he speaks on his own," as we read below (8:44).

Chrysostom explains this text in another way. The will of God is our peace, our love, and our humility; thus Matthew (5:9) says: "Happy are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons of God." But the love of controversy often distorts a person's mind to such an extent that he thinks that what is really true is false. Thus, when we abandon the spirit of controversy, we possess more surely the certitude of truth. "Answer, I entreat you, without contention, and judge, speaking what is just" (Jb 6:29). So our Lord is saying: If anyone wishes to judge my doctrine correctly, let him do the will of God, i.e., abandon the anger, the envy and the hatred which he has for me without reason. Then, nothing will prevent him from knowing whether this doctrine is from God, or whether I am speaking on my own, i.e., whether I am speaking the words of God.

Augustine explains it this way. It is the will of God that we know his works, just as it is the will of a head of a household that his servants do his works. The work of God is that we believe in him whom he has sent: "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he sent" (above 6:29). Thus he says: If anyone wants to do his will, that is, God's will, which is to believe in me, he will know whether this doctrine is from God: "If you do not believe, you will not understand," as that other version of Isaiah (7:9) says.

"He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory:" This will be he who is called Antichrist, "exalting himself," as the apostle says, "above all that is called God, and that is worshipped." The Lord, declaring that this same it is that will seek his own glory, not the glory of the Father, says to the Jews: "I am come in my Father's name, and ye have not received me; another will come in his own name, him ye will receive." He intimated that they would receive Antichrist, who will seek the glory of his own name, puffed up, not solid; and therefore not stable, but assuredly ruinous. But our Lord Jesus Christ has shown us a great example of humility: for doubtless He is equal with the Father, for "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;" yea, doubtless, He Himself said, and most truly said, "Am I so long time with you, and ye have not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." Yea, doubtless, Himself said, and most truly said, "I and the Father are one." If, therefore, He is one with the Father, equal to the Father, God from God, God with God, coeternal, immortal, alike unchangeable, alike without time, alike Creator and disposer of times; and yet because He came in time, and took the form of a servant, and in condition was found as a man, He seeks the glory of the Father, not His own; what oughtest thou to do, O man, who, when thou doest anything good, seekest thy own glory; but when thou doest anything ill, dost meditate calumny against God? Consider thyself: thou art a creature, acknowledge thy Creator: thou art a servant, despise not thy Lord: thou art adopted, not for thy own merits; seek His glory from whom thou hast this grace, that thou art a man adopted; His, whose glory He sought who is from Him, the Only-begotten. "But He that seeketh His glory that sent Him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in Him." In Antichrist, however, there is unrighteousness, and he is not true; because he will seek his own glory, not His by whom he was sent: for, indeed, he was not sent, but only permitted to come. Let us all, therefore, that belong to the body of Christ, seek not our own glory, that we be not led into the snares of Antichrist. But if Christ sought His glory that sent Him, how much more ought we to seek the glory of Him who made us?

(Tract. xxix. s. 8) He who seeketh his own glory is Antichrist. But our Lord set us an example of humility, in that being found in fashion as a man, He sought His Father's glory, not His own. Thou, when thou doest good, takest glory to thyself, when thou doest evil, upbraidest God.

"He who speaks of himself seeks his own glory;" but he who seeks his own glory is a liar, because he usurps what belongs to another: Isaiah 48: "I will not give my glory to another"; but I in teaching do not seek my own glory, but I seek the glory of him who sent me; therefore my doctrine is true. For this reason he says: "But he who seeks the glory of him who sent him, he is true, and there is no injustice in him." Christ sought the glory of his Divinity, not of his humanity, because to him all glory is due: 1 Timothy 1: "To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory," etc. "He is just and true," because conversely, to usurp another's honor for oneself is falsehood and injustice. So the Antichrist will usurp, of whom it is said in 2 Thessalonians 2: "He will be exalted and lifted up above all that is called God."

He giveth this evident proof that He doth not labour for His Own glory by His teaching, that He does not use any strange words and foreign to the law (for this were to speak of Himself), but that He is exhorting them rather to be obedient to the former oracles, while He removes only the unprofitable and gross shadow of the letter, and transforms it persuasively unto the spiritual sense, which already lay hid in types. What then He says in the Gospel according unto Matthew, I came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil; this again He indirectly intimates here. For the Gospel polity hath but the transformation of the letter into the truth, and having transfashioned the Mosaic type unto what is more fitting, hath the knowledge of the worship in spirit. Christ therefore speaketh and not of Himself, that is, nothing diverse from the things already foretold. For He doth not put away Moses, nor doth He teach us to reject the instruction of the law, but over what had been shadowed out in type, as it were some brighter tint to overlay the Truth. Very skilfully acquiring the good will of the Jews, does He offer the honour and glory to God the Father. For since the Jews knowing not the Word that had appeared from God the Father, were supposing that the Law had been given by the Father only, with reason did He affirm that He was glorified by the keeping of the Law, and endured the contrary if it were not kept as it ought. But even though the Son is partaker of the glory of the Father, and through Him had God the Father spoken to Moses, He yet assents to their opinions economically. But in that He speaks nothing of Himself that does not agree with the law, He confesses that not surely His own glory is it that He is zealous to build up, but that due to the Law.

Besides this, this too must be observed. For indirectly and darkly, He finds fault with the Jews who are falling into those very things which they ignorantly blame, and are accustomed to snatch at glory for themselves rather than God the Lord of all: and how, I will tell. For they falling away from the commandments of the law, were borne each to what liketh him, teaching, as it is written, for doctrines the commandments of men. For this again well does Christ convict them as transgressors, and as sinning against the |481 very Law-giver, in that they persuaded their hearers not to live after His ordinances, but rather to give heed to their doctrines. Therefore, albeit Christ says still indefinitely and absolutely, He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory, He is reproving the disease of the madness of the Pharisees, in that through their chusing to speak rather their own words, they are stealing the glory of the Lawgiver, and transferring to themselves the things due to God, they thence shun not at length to seek to kill Him. On which account specially convicts He them of transgressing, excusing themselves duly under the pretence that: they were zealous to keep the law, and thereby honour God the Father.

But he that seeketh (saith He) His Glory That sent Him, This one is true, and no unrighteousness is in Him. As he who doth not seek rather the honour of God but his own, is not true, but most exceedingly unjust: for he is not true, seeing he slandereth the Law, and bringeth in his own will in its place; most unjust too, in that he thrusteth aside the righteous judgment of the Lawgiver, and putteth his own above his Lord's. Righteous then and true is Christ, obnoxious to none of the aforesaid charges.

The fact that Jesus does not teach anything foreign to the law is clear proof that he does not labor for his own glory through his teaching, for if he did, he would speak of himself. Rather, he is exhorting them to be obedient to the former prophecies while he removes only the unprofitable and coarse shadow of the letter and transforms it persuasively into the spiritual sense, which already lay hidden in types. Here, Christ intimates what he says in the Gospel according to Matthew, "I came not to destroy the law but to fulfill it."

"He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory." That is, "He that desireth to establish any doctrine of his own, desireth to do so only that he himself may enjoy the glory. Now if I desire not to enjoy glory, wherefore should I desire to establish any doctrine of My own? He that speaketh of himself, that is, who speaketh anything peculiar or different from others, speaketh on this account, that he may establish his own glory; but if I seek the glory of Him that sent Me, wherefore should I choose to teach other things?" Seest thou that there was a cause wherefore He said there too that He "did nothing of Himself"? (c. v. 19, and viii. 28.) What was it? It was that they might believe that He desired not the honor of the many. Therefore when His words are lowly, "I seek," He saith, "the glory of the Father," everywhere desiring to persuade them that He Himself loveth not glory.

Now there are many reasons for His using lowly words, as that He might not be deemed unbegotten, or opposed to God, His being clothed with flesh, the infirmity of His hearers, that He might teach men to be modest, and to speak no great thing of themselves: while for speaking lofty words one could only find one reason, the greatness of His Nature. And if when He said, "Before Abraham was, I am" (c. viii. 58), they were offended, what would have been their case if they had continually heard high expressions?

If, he says, I wanted to avert you from God and draw you to me, it would have been evident that I was teaching you a doctrine contrary to God. But since I lead you to him through my words, it is clear and evident that these words that are said to you are just and that those who want to reprove them as sinful words have no reason to do so.

Then He adds another argument as well, namely: he who speaks of himself, that is, wishes to introduce his own teaching, does this for no other reason than to acquire glory for himself through it. But I do not desire to acquire glory for Myself, but seek the glory of Him who sent Me. Why then would I teach that which is foreign to Him? Therefore, I am true, and there is no unrighteousness in Me, that is, I do not appropriate to Myself the glory belonging to another, which would be unjust. Thus My teaching possesses both truth and righteousness. It does not proceed from ambition, so as to be false and unjust. For the ambitious man both lies, saying of himself things that exceed his worth, and commits unrighteousness, appropriating to himself glory that is another's and in no way belongs to him. But the Lord seeks glory for the Father and ascribes nothing to Himself. Clearly, He is true and righteous. We have said many times already, and will say now, that when the Lord says something humble about Himself, one should not think that He speaks this way because He is supposedly lower than the Father by His Nature, but He speaks this way so that He would not be considered an opponent of God, out of condescension to the weakness of His listeners, because He was clothed in flesh, and in order to teach us humility, so that we would not say anything great about ourselves. But when the Lord speaks lofty things and about His own glory, then we must believe that He speaks so exaltedly about Himself because of the greatness of His Nature, for He is equal to the Father in Essence.

As if He said, I speak the truth, because My doctrine containeth the truth: there is no unrighteousness in Me, because I usurp not another's glory.

Then when he says, Whoever speaks on his own seeks his own glory, he proves the same thing from his intention. And he presents two intentions through which we can recognize the two sources of a doctrine. Some are said to speak on their own, and others not on their own. Now whoever strives to speak the truth does not speak on his own. All our knowledge of the truth is from another: either from instruction, as from a teacher; or from revelation, as from God; or by a process of discovery, as from things themselves, for "the invisible things of God are clearly known by the things that have been made" (Rom 1:20). Consequently, in whatever way a person acquires his knowledge, he does not acquire it on his own. That person speaks on his own who takes what he says neither from things themselves, nor from any human teaching, but from his own heart: "They proclaim a vision taken out of their own hearts" (Jer 23:16); "Woe to those foolish prophets who prophesy out of their own hearts" (Ez 13:3). Accordingly, when a person devises a doctrine on his own he does it for the sake of human glory: for, as we see from Chrysostom, a person who wishes to present his own private doctrine does so for no other purpose than to acquire glory. And this is what our Lord says, proving that his doctrine is from God: Whoever speaks on his own, about a certain knowledge of the truth, which is really from another, seeks his own glory. It is for this reason, and because of pride, that various heresies and false opinions have arisen. And this is a characteristic of the antichrist "who opposes and is exalted above all that is called God, or is worshipped" (2 Thes 2:4).

But the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him, as I do—"I do not seek my own glory" (below 8:50)—is truthful, and there is no injustice in him. I am truthful because my doctrine contains the truth; there is no injustice in me because I do not appropriate the glory of another. As Augustine says: "He gave us a magnificent example of humility when, in the form of a man, he sought the glory of the Father, and not his own. O man, you should do the same! When you do something good, you seek your glory; when you do something evil, you insult God." It is obvious that he was not looking for his own glory, because if he had not been an enemy of the chief priests, he would not have been persecuted by them. So Christ, and everyone who is looking for the glory of God, has knowledge in his intellect, "Master, we know that you are truthful" (Mt 22:16): thus he says, he is truthful. And he has the correct intention in his will: thus he says, and there is no injustice in him. For a person is unjust when he takes for himself what belongs to another; but glory is proper to God alone; therefore, he who seeks glory for himself is unjust.

The passage of the holy Gospel of which we have before discoursed to you, beloved, is followed by that of to-day, which has just now been read. Both the disciples and the Jews heard the Lord speaking; both men of truth and liars heard the Truth speaking; both friends and enemies heard Charity speaking; both good men and bad men heard the Good speaking. They heard, but He discerned; He saw and foresaw whom His discourse profited and would profit. Among those who were then, He saw; among us who were to be, He foresaw. Let us therefore hear the Gospel, just as if we were listening to the Lord Himself present: nor let us say, O happy they who were able to see Him! because there were many of them who saw, and also killed Him; and there are many among us who have not seen Him, and yet have believed. For the precious truth that sounded forth from the mouth of the Lord was both written for our sakes, and preserved for our sakes, and recited for our sakes, and will be recited also for the sake of our prosperity, even until the end of the world. The Lord is above; but the Lord, the Truth, is also here. For the body of the Lord, in which He rose again from the dead, can be only in one place; but His truth is everywhere diffused. Let us then hear the Lord, and let us also speak that which He shall have granted to us concerning His own words.

"Did not Moses," saith He, "give you the law, and yet none of you doeth the law? Why do ye seek to kill me?" For ye seek to kill me just for this reason, that none of you doeth the law; for if ye did do the law, ye would recognize Christ in its very letters, and ye would not kill Him when present with you.

Or He means to say, that if they kept the law, they would see Him pointed to in every part of it, and would not seek to kill Him, when He came.

The Lord rebukes them for the hidden malice of their heart, because they wished to kill him — against the commandment of the Law; for this reason he says: "Did not Moses give you the Law?" which you are bound to observe by your own promise, according to that passage in Exodus 24: "All things that the Lord has commanded us, we will do." "And none of you keeps the Law?" The Psalm says: "They have all turned aside, they have together become unprofitable: there is none who does good, no, not even one"; because already in your heart you have transgressed it; which he shows by revealing the malice of the heart.

By many devices cometh about the discourse of the Saviour to one aim. For having in the preceding, indirectly blamed (as was meet) the Pharisees who supposed that they ought not to obey the commands from above, but to introduce their own opinions, and were zealous rather to gain honour from those under them, and did not offer it to the Lord of all, but diverted it to their own persons, that thence they were daring to transgress more freely:----He again, in other and severest wise, prepares for them open at length and unveiled reproof. For He being condemned for breach of the sabbath, and enduring the most unjust accusation of lawlessness for this, convicted them not of individually transgressing the law, but that the whole nation of the Jews had made the law of Moses of no account. For tell Me (He saith) ye who condemn the man who is zealous to show mercy on the sabbath day, who have passed foullest censure upon those who do well, and freely condemn the compassionate, hath not the commandment not to murder been delivered you by Moses, whom ye admire? did ye not hear him say, The innocent and righteous slay thou not? why then do ye grieve even your own Moses, by so readily transgressing the Law that was appointed through him? An argument and clear proof of this, is that ye persecute Me who have done no wrong, and are unjustly eager to slay Him who can never be accused of that whereby He should suffer this.

Very pointed then is the Saviour's discourse and most severely herein does He attack the mad folly of the Jews, and show that they who fall as it were with unbridled course unto condemning Him for His transgression of the sabbath, show themselves transgressors, and chusers of murder, and for this cause alone fall into the worst of all sins. He all but cries aloud, The paralytic who had fallen into a bitter and incurable complaint, and who was spent with weakness at length intolerable, I have healed on the sabbath day: but for My well-doing, I am condemned as though I had been taken in the worst of crimes, and for this ye determined murder against Me. What manner of punishment then (He says) shall be devised for you commensurate with such monstrous deeds? for lo, yourselves too are transgressing the law; but the mode of your transgressions, is not of like nature with the charges against Me. For not as well-doers, like Me, are ye persuaded to do this, but with a view to murder, which is worse than all transgression. How then is Moses with you in these things, on whose account I, though a Preserver, am condemned? did not he appoint you the law concerning this? do not ye again, while trampling on My Word, ignore its transgression, by devising murder unjustly? Such things then might Christ well say to the ungodly Pharisees. But He abstracts the Law for the present from His Own Person, although He is Himself the Lawgiver, and attributes it as it were to |483 the Father Alone, by Him specially shaming into silence the shameless Jews, among whom He was considered greater than He. For, as we have often said, they did not yet acknowledge that He is God by Nature, nor did they yet know the deep mystery of the economy with Flesh, but admired rather the glory of Moses.

"Did not Moses give you the Law? and yet none of you keepeth the Law? Why go ye about to kill Me?" The Jews brought against Him two accusations; one, that He broke the Sabbath; the other, that He called God His Father, making Himself equal with God. And that this was no imagination of theirs, but His own declared judgment, and that He spake not as do the many, but in a special and peculiar sense, is clear from this circumstance. Many often called God their Father; as "Have we not all one Father, hath not one God created us?" (Mal. ii. 10), but not for that was the people equal to God, on which account the hearers were not offended. As then when the Jews said, "This man is not from God," He often healed them, and made defense for the violation of the Sabbath; so now had the sense they assigned to His words been according to their imagination, not according to His intention, He would have corrected them, and said, "Why suppose ye Me equal to God? I am not equal"; yet He said nothing of the kind, but, on the contrary, declared by what followed, that He is equal. For, "As the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them, so also the Son" (c. v. 21); and "That all may honor the Son as they honor the Father"; and "The works which He doeth, the same doeth the Son likewise;" all these go to establish His equality. Again, concerning the Law He saith, "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets." (Matt. v. 17.) Thus He knoweth how to remove evil suspicions which are in their minds; but in this place He not only doth not remove, but even confirmeth their suspicion of His equality. On which account also, when they said in another place, "Thou makest thyself God," He did not remove their suspicion, but even confirmed it, saying, "That ye may know that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins, He saith to the sick of the palsy, Take up thy bed, and walk." (Matt. ix. 6.) This then He first aimed at, to make Himself equal with God, showing that He was not God's adversary, but that He said the same and taught the same with Him...

"The Law saith, Thou shalt not kill; but ye kill, and yet accuse Me as transgressing the Law." But wherefore saith He, "None of you"? Because they all sought to kill Him. "And if," He saith, "I even have broken the Law, it was in saving a man, but ye transgress it for evil. And if My action was even a transgression, yet it was in order to save, and I ought not to be judged by you who transgress in the greatest matters. For your conduct is a subverting of the whole Law." Then also He presseth it farther, although He had said many things to them before, but at that former time He spake after a loftier manner, and more suitably to His own dignity, while now He speaketh more humbly. Wherefore? Because He would not continually irritate them. At present their anger had become intense, and they went on to murder. And therefore He continueth to check them in these two ways, by reproving their evil daring, and saying, "Why go ye about to kill Me?" and by modestly calling Himself, "A Man that hath told you the truth" (c. viii. 40), and by showing that murderers in heart are not worthy to judge others.

If, he says, you really defend the law of Moses, prove to me that you actually preserve it, and tell me why you want to kill me: this is contrary to the law more than any other violation.

Apparently, the present words of the Lord have no connection with what was said before; but when we look more closely, they are in close connection. He is accused of violating the Sabbath and transgressing the law. He counters this by saying that rather "they are the transgressors of the law." The law says: "thou shalt not kill" (Exod. 20:13), yet you seek to kill Me. Therefore, you are the transgressors of the law, not I. So then, you allow yourselves to commit injustice, yet you accuse Me of transgressing the law because I healed a man on the Sabbath. The Lord said "none of you acts according to the law," because all those with whom He was speaking sought to kill Him.

Then he answers an objection. For someone could tell Christ that his doctrine was not from God because he broke the sabbath, according to, "This man is not from God, for he does not keep the sabbath" (below 9:16). This is what he intends to answer; and he does three things. First, he clears himself, by arguing from the actions of those who are accusing him; secondly, we see their vicious reply (v 20); and thirdly, he vindicates himself with a reasonable explanation (v 21).

He says: Even granting, as you say, that my doctrine is not from God because I do not keep the law, breaking the sabbath, nevertheless, you do not have any reason to accuse me since you do the same thing. Thus he says: Did not Moses give you the law? i.e., did he not give it to your people? And yet none of you obey the law. "You received the law through the angels, and have not kept it" (Acts 7:53). This is why Peter says: "A yoke, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" (Acts 15:10). Therefore, if you do not keep the law, why do you want to kill me for not keeping it? You are not doing this because of the law, but out of hatred. If you were acting out of devotion for the law, you would keep it yourselves. "Let us lie in wait for the just man, because he is unfavorable to us, and against our works, and he reproaches us for breaking the law" (Wis 2:12); and a little further on we read: "Let us condemn him to a most shameful death" (Wis 2:20).

Or, it could be explained this way: You do not keep the law that Moses gave you; and this is obvious from the fact that you want to kill me, which is against the law: "You shall not kill" (Ex 20:13). Another explanation, following Augustine, is: You do not keep the law because I myself am included in the law: "If you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me as well, for it was about me that he wrote" (above 5:46). But you want to kill me.

But the Lord, manifestly not disturbed, but calm in His truth, rendered not evil for evil nor railing for railing; although, if He were to say to these men, You have a devil, He would certainly be saying what was true. For they would not have said such things to the Truth, unless the falsehood of the devil had instigated them. What then did He answer? Let us calmly hear, and drink in the serene word: "I have done one work, and ye all marvel." As if He said, What if ye were to see all my works? For they were His works which they saw in the world, and yet they saw not Him who made them all: He did one thing, and they were disturbed because he made a man whole on the Sabbath-day. As if, indeed, when any sick man recovered his health on the Sabbath-day, it had been any other that made such a man whole than He who offended them, because He made one man whole on the Sabbath-day. For who else has made others whole than He who is health itself,-He who gives even to the beasts that health which He gave to this man? For it was bodily health. The health of the flesh is repaired, and the flesh dies; and when it is repaired, death is only put off, not taken away. However, even that same health, brethren, is from the Lord, through whomsoever it may be given: by whose care and ministry soever it may be imparted, it is given by Him from whom all health is, to whom it is said in the psalm, "O Lord, Thou wilt save men and beasts; as Thou hast multiplied Thy mercy, O God." For because Thou art God Thy multiplied mercy reaches even to the safety of human flesh, reaches even to the safety of dumb animals; but Thou who givest health of flesh common to men and beasts, is there no health which Thou reservest for men? There is certainly another which is not only not common to men and beasts, but to men themselves is not common to good and bad. In a word, when he had there spoken of this health which men and cattle receive in common, because of that health which men, but only the good, ought to hope for, he added as he went on: "But the sons of men shall put their trust under the cover of Thy wings. They shall be fully satisfied with the fatness of Thy house; and Thou shalt give them drink from the torrent of Thy pleasure. For with Thee is the fountain of life; and in Thy light shall they see light." This is the health which belongs to good men, those whom he called "sons of men;" whilst he had said above, "O Lord, Thou shall save men and beasts." How then? Were not those men sons of men, that after he had said men, he should go on and say, But the sons of men: as if men and sons of men meant different things? Yet I do not believe that the Holy Spirit had said this without some indication of distinction. The term men refers to the first Adam, sons of men to Christ. Perhaps, indeed, men relate to the first man; but sons of men relate to the Son of man.

(Tr. xxx. s. 3) As if He said, What if ye saw all My works? For all that they saw going on in the world was of His working, but they saw not Him Who made all things. But He did one thing, made a man whole on the sabbath day, and they were in commotion: as if, when any one of them recovered from a disease on the sabbath, he who made him whole were any other than He, who had offended them by making one man whole on the sabbath.

Wherein He left us an example to take it patiently, whenever wrong censures are passed upon us, and not answer them by asserting the truth, though able to do so, but rather by some wholesome advice to the persons; as doth our Lord: Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel.

"Jesus answered and said to them: I did one work, and you all marvel." This work was the healing of the paralytic; they marveled at what he had done and were indignant that it was on the Sabbath; above in chapter 5: "The Jews persecuted Jesus, because he did this on the Sabbath," as though he were breaking the Law. Therefore the Lord shows that he did not break the Law, through an argument from the greater, and he makes such an argument: if circumcision, which is not from the Law but from the Fathers, does not break the Sabbath, because it is a noble work, therefore, since the healing of the whole man is a nobler work, much less will it break it.

We will read the verse, as a question, with a comma, and a full stop. But we will not be ignorant of the subtle meaning of the word, replete with a most wise economy. For observe how on relating to the Jews His Loving-kindness to the impotent man, He does not say unguardedly, I have healed the man on the sabbath day, and do ye therefore marvel? but more cautiously and far more heedfully, He says, One work I did, soothing the unseasonable anger of the multitude; for it was not unlikely, that they, cut by the transgression against the sabbath, would even now attempt to stone Jesus. For indiscreet of counsel, according to the Greek poets, and prone to anger is ever the multitude, both applying gentlest accord to whatsoever it is minded to, and easily excited like a bull unto intolerable daring, it is caught more apt than it ought in daring undertakings to dreadful ends. Having therefore put away all boast for their profit's sake, He makes use of the gentlest words and with exceeding moderation He says, One work I did, and do ye all marvel? On account of this one work (He says) although it was wrought for the salvation and life of the prostrate, do ye condemn the mighty Worker thereof, as though for offences truly heinous, and looking only to the honour of the Sabbath, accord not wonder to the miracle? (for this indeed would have been more fitting) but because the commandment of the law has been broken according to your foolish imagination, for no slight or worthless reasons, but for the salvation and life of a man, ye are unreasonably angry, when ye ought rather to praise Him Who is clad with so great and God-befitting power. Untutored then by these things also are the people of the Jews proved to be, expending undue astonishment upon the man that was healed, and not rather offering it to Christ Who miraculously preserveth.

But we must know, that He, in addressing them of Israel and saying, One work I did, and do ye all marvel? again indirectly reproves and makes known something of this kind. For on account of this one (according to you) offence of Mine (He says) ye marvel at My purpose, as though I were bold to thrust aside the Lawgiver: then how deem ye that God feels towards you, who not once merely offend against the Law, but make nothing of transgressing it, in matters for which ye judge others?

The meaning of, "Ye marvel" (Matt. xii. 5) is, "Ye are confused," "are troubled." For if the Law was to be lasting, circumcision would not have been more authoritative than it. And He said not, "I have done a thing greater than circumcision," but abundantly refuteth them...

"I have done one work, and ye all marvel." Observe how He argueth, where it is necessary to defend Himself, and make His defense a charge against them. For with respect to that which had been wrought, He introduceth not the Person of the Father, but His own: "I have done one work." He would show, that not to have done it would have been to break the Law, and that there are many things more authoritative than the Law, and that "Moses" endured to receive a command against the Law, and more authoritative than the Law. For "circumcision" is more authoritative than the Sabbath, and yet circumcision is not of the Law, but of "the fathers." "But I," He saith, "have done that which is more authoritative and better than circumcision." Then He mentioneth not the command of the Law; for instance, that the Priests profane the Sabbath, as He had said already, but speaketh more largely.

That the Jews rise up against the Lord in vain, He proves by the following reasoning. I performed one deed on the Sabbath, healed the paralytic, and because of this all of you marvel, that is, you are troubled, you raise an alarm.

Then when he says, I performed one work, and you are all amazed, our Lord, at peace in his own truth, answers them, and justifies himself with a reasonable explanation. First, he recalls the incident that is troubling them; secondly, he shows that this should not bother them (v 22); and thirdly, he shows the way to a judgment that is just (v 24).

Jesus answered them: I performed one work, and you are all amazed. He does not trade one insult for another, nor rebuff it, because "When he was derided, he did not deride in return" (1 Pt 2:23). He rather recalls for them his cure of the paralytic, which was the cause of their amazement. But their amazement was not one of devotion, as in "Your heart will be amazed and expanded" (Is 60:5), but a kind of agitation and disturbance, as in "Those who see it will be afflicted with terrible fear, and will be amazed" (Wis 5:2). So, if you are amazed over one of my works, i.e., if you are disturbed and troubled, what would you do if you saw all of my works? For, as Augustine says, his works were those which they saw in the world: even all the sick are healed by him. "He sent his word, and healed them" (Ps 106:20); "It was neither a herb nor a poultice that healed them, but your word, O Lord, which heals all" (Wis 16:12). Thus, the reason why you are disturbed is that you have seen only one of my works, and not all of them.

Circumcision was given for three reasons; first, as a sign of Abraham's great faith; secondly, to distinguish the Jews from other nations; thirdly, that the receiving of it on the organ of virility, might admonish us to observe chastity both of body and mind. And circumcision then possessed the same virtue that baptism does now; only that the gate was not yet open. Our Lord concludes: If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at Me because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?

"I have done one work, and ye all marvel." And immediately He subjoined: "Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision." It was well done that ye received circumcision from Moses. "Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers;" since it was Abraham that first received circumcision from the Lord. "And ye circumcise on the Sabbath-day." Moses has convicted you: ye have received in the law to circumcise on the eighth day; ye have received in the law to cease from labor on the seventh day; if the eighth day from the child's birth fall on the seventh day of the week, what will ye do? Will ye abstain from work to keep the Sabbath, or will ye circumcise to fulfill the sacrament of the eighth day? But I know, saith He, what ye do. "Ye circumcise a man." Why? Because circumcision relates to what is a kind of seal of salvation, and men ought not to abstain from the work of salvation on the Sabbath-day. Therefore be ye not "angry with me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath-day." "If," saith He, "a man on the Sabbath-day receiveth circumcision that the law should not be broken" (for it was something saving that was ordained by Moses in that ordinance of circumcision), why are ye angry at me for working a healing on the Sabbath-day?

Perhaps, indeed, that circumcision pointed to the Lord Himself, at whom they were indignant, because He worked cures and healing. For circumcision was commanded to be applied on the eighth day: and what is circumcision but the spoiling of the flesh? This circumcision, then, signified the removal of carnal lusts from the heart. Therefore not without cause was it given, and ordered to be made in that member; since by that member the creature of mortal kind is procreated. By one man came death, just as by one man the resurrection of the dead; and by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin. Therefore every man is born with a foreskin, because every man is born with the vice of propagation; and God cleanses not, either from the vice with which we are born, or from the vices which we add thereto by ill living, except by the stony knife, the Lord Christ. For Christ was the Rock. Now they used to circumcise with stone knives, and by the name of rock they prefigured Christ; and yet when He was present with them they did not acknowledge Him, but besides, they sought to kill Him. But why on the eighth day, unless because after the seventh day of the week the Lord rose again on the Lord's day? Therefore Christ's resurrection, which happened on the third day indeed of His passion, but on the eighth day in the days of the week, that same resurrection it is that doth circumcise us. Hear of those that were circumcised with the real stone, while the apostle admonishes them: "If then ye be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting on the right hand of God; set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth." He speaks to the circumcised: Christ has risen; He has taken away from you carnal desires, evil lusts, the superfluity with which you were born, and that far worse which you had added thereto by ill living; being circumcised by the Rock, why do you still set your affections on the earth? And finally, for that "Moses gave you the law, and ye circumcise a man on the Sabbath-day," understand that by this is signified the good work which I have done, in that I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath-day; because he was cured that he might be whole in body, and also he believed that he might be whole in soul.

(Tr. xxx. s. 4) As if He said, Ye have done well to receive circumcision from Moses, not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers; for Abraham first received circumcision from the Lord. And ye circumcise on the sabbath. Moses has convicted you: ye received a law to circumcise on the eighth day; and ye received a law to rest on the seventh day. If the eighth day after a child is born happen to be the sabbath, ye circumcise the child; because circumcision appertaineth to, is a kind of sign of, salvation; and men ought not to rest from the work of salvation on the sabbath.

(Tr. xxx. 5) Circumcision also was perhaps a type of our Lord Himself. For what is circumcision but a robbing of the flesh, to signify the robbing the heart of its carnal lusts. And therefore it was not without reason that it was applied to that member by which the mortal creature is propagated: for by one man sin entered into the world. (Rom. 5:12) And therefore every one is born with the foreskin, because every one is born with the fault of his propagation. (vite propagenis) And God does not change us either from the corruption of our birth, or from that we have contracted ourselves by a bad life, except by Christ: and therefore they circumcised with knives of stone, to prefigure Christ, who is the stone; and on the eighth day, because our Lord's resurrection took place on the day after the seventh day; which resurrection circumcises us, i. e. destroys our carnal appetites. Regard this, saith our Lord, as a type of My good work in making a man every whit whole on the sabbath day: for he was healed, that he might be whole in body, and he believed, that he might be whole in mind. Ye are forbidden indeed to do servile work on the sabbath; but is it a servile work to heal on the sabbath? Ye eat and drink on the sabbath, because it is necessary for your health: which shows that works of healing are by no means to be omitted on the sabbath.

"Therefore Moses gave you circumcision, not because it is from Moses, but from the Fathers," that is, not because it was first commanded to him, but to Abraham; Genesis 17: "Every male among you shall be circumcised." "And on the Sabbath you circumcise a man," on account of that which is written in the same place: "An infant of eight days shall be circumcised"; and yet you do not believe you are breaking the Law, but keeping it. From this he argues through an argument from the greater, because it seems more likely that circumcision would break it than perfect healing.

But it is asked here whether circumcision ought to be performed on the Sabbath. And that it should, the Lord seems to say here. And the reason is that it had to be done on the eighth day. But to the contrary: The precept concerning the Sabbath was the greatest among all precepts of the Law and the most frequently repeated; therefore a lesser precept ought to yield to a greater one. Therefore they ought to have refrained from circumcising on the Sabbath.

I respond: It must be said that the precept concerning the Sabbath is great and did not oppose circumcision, because it did not prohibit a work of salvation but of servitude; whence on the Sabbath the Law was expounded, because teaching is a salvific work; and therefore it did not yield to circumcision, but both precepts ran together simultaneously.

It is asked: why was circumcision given before the Law? It must be said that one principal cause of the giving of circumcision was the distinction of the people from whom Christ was to be born from the nations; and because Abraham was first called, to whom the promise was made, therefore it began from him. There are also other causes for the giving of circumcision, why it was given to the people of God rather than another sign: It is a sign of Abraham's faith, a merit of obedience, it distinguishes the people, it heals against original sin, it signifies the eighth day of the resurrection, it teaches chastity.

Of deep meaning is the word, and hard to be reached the purpose of the text, but it will be manifest through the grace of Him That illuminateth. Defeating then by many words the uninstructedness of the Jews, and manifoldly teaching them that they ought not to go off to unseasonable wrath on account of the breach of the sabbath, by reason the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath day: but having at length attained no good effect by reason of the ill-counsel of the hearers, He passes on to another mode of economy, and endeavours to show clearly that the hierophant Moses himself, the minister of the Law, brake the Law of the sabbath on account of the circumcision, which had extended from the custom of the fathers even unto his own times, that he too might with reason be shown to be an observer of the custom of the fathers, and since God works on the sabbath, therefore He revealing Himself too as a worker holds that it is in no wise a transgression of the sabbath, by reason of His being ever like minded with the Father. Wherefore He also said, My Father worketh hitherto and I work. In order then (He saith) that ye, beholding Me working on the sabbath day, may not marvel as at some strange and most monstrous thing, Moses hath given you circumcision on the sabbath, and he was beforehand in breaking the Law respecting it. And why? He did not think he should be doing right, in dishonouring the Law given to the Fathers, and their custom, on account of the sabbath day. Therefore a man is circumcised on the sabbath day too. But if Moses considered that he ought to honour the custom of the fathers, and made that superior to the honour of the sabbath, why are ye vainly troubled at Me, and marvel at Me, as though I were one of those wont heedlessly to transgress the Law, out of contempt for the Law? albeit (He says) I work equally with the Father, and ever agree with Him in every purpose: and since He works on the Sabbath day, well do I refuse to be idle thereon. He says that Moses gave them, circumcision, although it was not of him according to what has been just said, but of the fathers, because the ordinance of circumcision was given to the fathers, but its rites were more definitely and clearly ordered by Moses. For our forefather Abraham was circumcised, but not on the eighth day, nor was a pair of turtle doves or two young pigeons offered for him, in accordance with the rites of Moses.

Many sources in Scripture tell us that we should do no work on the sabbath. We are to rest as it were and quit doing all those tasks that invite sweat and labor. For he says in Exodus, "Six years you shall sow your land and gather in the fruit, but in the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie still." … Now, it is not the land—which does not even know what work is—that he releases; nor is it to the land that he gives this law. It was given to those who possessed the land. He gave rest to the land so that they would not work on it. In this and many other ways he pointed toward our feast with Christ, a feast in which those who have lived in divine fear will hurry toward that perfect and complete liberty that is in holiness and will run to that most wealthy grace of the Spirit. This is clear in the commands themselves of Moses. It is written, "If your brother, a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you, he shall serve you six years, and in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you." We, who were originally slaves to sin, had, after a fashion, sold ourselves to the devil by taking pleasure in evil. But now, being justified in Christ through faith, we shall mount up to the true and holy keeping of the sabbath, clothed with the liberty that comes through grace and glorified with the good things of God.

It is clear therefore, that He loosed and vivified those who believe in Him as Abraham did, doing nothing contrary to the law when He healed upon the Sabbath-day. For the law did not prohibit men from being healed upon the Sabbaths; [on the contrary,] it even circumcised them upon that day, and gave command that the offices should be performed by the priests for the people; yea, it did not disallow the healing even of dumb animals. Both at Siloam and on frequent subsequent occasions, did He perform cures upon the Sabbath; and for this reason many used to resort to Him on the Sabbath-days. For the law commanded them to abstain from every servile work, that is, from all grasping after wealth which is procured by trading and by other worldly business; but it exhorted them to attend to the exercises of the soul, which consist in reflection, and to addresses of a beneficial kind for their neighbours' benefit. And therefore the Lord reproved those who unjustly blamed Him for having healed upon the Sabbath-days. For He did not make void, but fulfilled the law, by performing the offices of the high priest, propitiating God for men, and cleansing the lepers, healing the sick, and Himself suffering death, that exiled man might go forth from condemnation, and might return without fear to his own inheritance.

For if the Law was to be lasting, circumcision would not have been more authoritative than it.

"Seest thou that the Law is most established when a man breaketh it? Seest thou that the breaking of the Sabbath is the keeping of the Law? that if the Sabbath were not broken, the Law must needs have been broken? so that I also have established the Law." He said not, "Ye are wroth with Me because I have wrought a thing which is greater than circumcision," but having merely mentioned what had been done, He left it to them to judge, whether entire health was not a more necessary thing than circumcision. "The Law," He saith, "is broken, that a man may receive a sign which contributeth nothing to health; are ye vexed and indignant at its being broken, that one might be freed from so grievous a disease?"

For, tell me, did God wish the priests to sin when they offer the sacrifices on the Sabbaths? or those to sin, who are circumcised and do circumcise on the Sabbaths; since He commands that on the eighth day-even though it happen to be a Sabbath-those who are born shall be always circumcised? or could not the infants be operated upon one day previous or one day subsequent to the Sabbath, if He knew that it is a sinful act upon the Sabbaths? Or why did He not teach those-who are called righteous and pleasing to Him, who lived before Moses and Abraham, who were not circumcised in their foreskin, and observed no Sabbaths-to keep these institutions?

Jesus then employs a very convincing argument: Moses, he says, established circumcision and the sabbath and ordered that men were to be circumcised on the sabbath. But Moses established the sabbath out of convenience. Indeed, at that time nobody observed it.… He also established circumcision needlessly because it had been already established by the patriarchs. But he established this rule [about circumcision] too, in order to teach that this observance [of the sabbath] does not exist when there are cases of necessity and that sometimes it must be broken. If the sabbath can be broken for circumcision, because Moses ordered it so—and this is not considered to be a violation of the law—why then do you think the fact that a man was healed on the sabbath is a violation of the law? And, he added, making them ashamed: "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment." If a transgressor of the law is one who performs something on the sabbath, the first one to be blamed should be Moses. But if Moses is not considered to be a transgressor of the law, my action is the more excellent and I am even more above reproach.

Meanwhile Moses himself, this lawgiver, broke the Sabbath when he commanded that every soul (person) be circumcised on the eighth day (Lev. 12:3). Although circumcision was not from Moses, but from the fathers, nevertheless it, being not from Moses, violated the law concerning the Sabbath given by Moses. For it often happened that the eighth day, on which it was necessary to be circumcised, fell on a Sabbath.

Then he shows that there is no reason why they should be disturbed. First, he recalls the command given to them by Moses; secondly, he states their customary behavior; and thirdly, he presents an argument based on the first two.

The command of Moses was about circumcision; so he says: Therefore, i.e., to signify my works, Moses gave you circumcision. For circumcision was given as a sign, as we read, "it will be a sign of the covenant between me and you" (Gn 17:11). For it signified Christ. This is the reason why it was always done on the genital organ, because Christ was to descend, in his human nature, from Abraham; and Christ is the one who spiritually circumcises us, i.e., both in mind and body. Or, it was done to the genital organ because it was given in opposition to original sin.

We do not find it explicitly stated that Moses gave circumcision, unless in Exodus (12:44): "Every slave who is bought shall be circumcised." And although Moses did tell them to circumcise, he was not the one who established this practice, because he was not the first one to receive the command to circumcise; this was Abraham, as we see from Genesis (17:10).

Now it was the custom among the Jews to circumcise on the sabbath. And this is what he says: you circumcise on the sabbath day. They did this because Abraham was told that a boy should be circumcised on the eighth day: "He circumcised him on the eighth day, as God had commanded him" (Gn 21:4). On the other hand, they were told by Moses not to do any work on the sabbath. But it sometimes happened that the eighth day was a sabbath. And so, in circumcising a boy on that day, they were breaking a command of Moses for a command of the patriarchs.

On the fifth day the land and water brought forth their progenies. On the sixth day the things that were wanting were created; and thus God raised up man from the soil, as lord of all the things which He created upon the earth and the water. Yet He created angels and archangels before He created man, placing spiritual beings before earthly ones. For light was made before sky and the earth. This sixth day is called parasceve, that is to say, the preparation of the kingdom. For He perfected Adam, whom He made after His image and likeness. But for this reason He completed His works before He created angels and fashioned man, lest perchance they should falsely assert that they had been His helpers. On this day also. on account of the passion of the Lord Jesus Christ, we make either a station to God, or a fast. On the seventh day He rested from all His works, and blessed it, and sanctified it. On the former day we are accustomed to fast rigorously, that on the Lord's day we may go forth to our bread with giving of thanks. And let the parasceve become a rigorous fast, lest we should appear to observe any Sabbath with the Jews, which Christ Himself, the Lord of the Sabbath, says by His prophets that "His soul hateth; " which Sabbath He in His body abolished, although, nevertheless, He had formerly Himself commanded Moses that circumcision should not pass over the eighth day, which day very frequently happens on the Sabbath, as we read written in the Gospel. Moses, foreseeing the hardness of that people, on the Sabbath raised up his hands, therefore, and thus figuratively fastened himself to a cross. And in the battle they were sought for by the foreigners on the Sabbath-day, that they might be taken captive, and, as if by the very strictness of the law, might be fashioned to the avoidance of its teaching.

"If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the Law of Moses may not be broken: are you indignant at me, because I made a whole man well on the Sabbath?" As if to say: since it is lawful and does not break the Sabbath, your indignation is not just, because, according to that passage in Romans 10, "they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge."

It is asked concerning the Lord's argument that circumcision did not break the Sabbath, much less did the healing of the paralytic. This argument seems to have no force: Because circumcision was commanded and could not be deferred, but the healing could have been done on another day. Furthermore, circumcision was a spiritual work insofar as it cleansed from original sin; but that healing was a corporeal work, because the illness was corporeal.

I respond: It must be said that the Law of Moses did not command circumcision but presupposed it as from a more worthy source; whence it is said in Exodus twelve: "If any stranger wishes to pass over into your colony, he shall be circumcised." But the Sabbath was commanded in the Law and did not take away circumcision, which was from the Fathers; therefore much less did it take away healing from God, even though it was not commanded.

To the other objection it must be said that the healing of that paralytic was not only corporeal but also spiritual; whence it was said to him: "Sin no more henceforth." And therefore it is said in the text: "I have made a whole man well," namely interiorly and exteriorly; even granting that it was only exteriorly in the body, nevertheless it was still a work of piety, and certainly the Law regarded works of piety as spiritual. Whence on the Sabbath it was permitted to give alms. For if it was permitted to water a donkey, how much more to give alms, and especially to heal the sick.

CHAPTER VI. A dissertation upon the rest of the Sabbath, manifoldly showing of what it is significant.

The verse is unintelligible to the many and not very clear as to its subdivisions; we will therefore speak of that first. We will therefore read it bit by bit, changing the structure of the verse; for thus you will clearly understand the meaning. If then (He says) a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, are ye angry at Me, that the law of Moses should not be broken, because I made a whole man well on the sabbath day? For a man does not receive circumcision on the sabbath day, that the Law of Moses be not broken: for it is broken when the sabbath is made void by circumcision. For as we taught before, yea rather as the Saviour Himself said, circumcision is not of Moses but of the fathers. So that by reason of the circumcision from the fathers, the Law of Moses is broken, I mean that respecting the sabbath. Therefore we must connect the words, that the Law of Moses should not be broken, to our Saviour's words: for He says, are ye angry at Me, that the Law of Moses should not be broken, because I made a whole man well on the sabbath day? The case of the sub-division then has been now herein settled, we must go to the interpretation of the things signified too, even though they are exceedingly hard to understand. Circumcision, then (He says) is a way of taking care for a man, and it surpasses the ordinance itself of the sabbath. For it was of necessity that the suffering should be made whole. What then is |488 the hindrance, or how will the ordinance of the sabbath reasonably stand in the way of healing the whole body, since it permits already without blame its breach by a partial and slight healing? for a man is circumcised and healed of the wound without blame on the Sabbath day. Vainly then (He says) are ye indignant, to the Worker of the better things objecting the transgression of the Law, when the law is not grieved at being put aside by Moses for a petty circumcision. By these things is enwoven an argument, persuading them to agree that they ought not vainly to be annoyed, since Moses had already been a type thereof, whom they foolishly thought they ought to take the part of, and making no account of his law, were being hurried off to the duty of committing murder.

But since our discourse, which was upon the mention of the sabbath, hath flowed into that of the circumcision, I think that not less profit than is due will accrue to the true searcher after wisdom, through his clearly beholding, what the seventh day rest means, what again is signified by the circumcision on the eighth day, and by his learning in addition, why circumcision is received on the sabbath itself, not enduring to keep the legal-rest: rightly examining each point, as well as I can, I will endeavour to make it clear. The first consideration will be that of the seventh day, or sabbath, and its rest. For so will the enquiry into what follows be most convenient. Therefore let us enquire into the first appointed law on this subject, how and in what manner it arose.

For when God brought Israel out of the bondage in Egypt unto their original and ancient freedom, by the hand of the all-wise Moses, and having miraculously brought them through the midst of the sea, with foot somehow dry and unwetted, commanded them to hasten on unto the land of promise, at length, accustoming them of necessity to purify themselves beforehand and cleanse themselves, He called them to an assembly in mount Sinai: and having descended upon it in the likeness of fire, He gave them decrees unto salvation, saying, I am the LORD thy God, Which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods but Me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any image nor any likeness that is in heaven above or that is in the earth beneath or that is in the water under the earth, thou shalt not worship them nor serve them, for I am the LORD thy God, a jealous God. For it was fitting, it was fitting thence to commence the ordinance of what was profitable, and first to fore-initiate with the doctrines of Divine knowledge, them who had once given themselves to the service and obedience of God. For knowledge of God is the root of all virtue, and the foundation of piety is faith. Having therefore revealed Himself, and as it were made Himself manifest by saying, I am the LORD thy God, and having first wrought in them faith by knowledge, and having wholly interdicted the making of an image and the worship of falsely-called gods, He shows that their transgression will not be unpunished, and sets before them the punishment of turning aside, crying, Thou shalt not take the Name of the LORD thy God in vain, that is, thou shalt not put about a vain idol the Divine and most dread Name: for the LORD (He says) will not hold him guiltless that taketh His Name in vain. Having then said that he shall be guilty of no slight transgression, who shall please to worship another, and to enrol himself under a false god, and having threatened them accordingly, as people newly brought to the faith and having a feebler understanding, He adds in order, and as it were establishes a second law, saying, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy: six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God, in it thou shalt not do any work. Then profitably showing Whom they will imitate in so doing, He says, For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth and the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the seventh day and hallowed it.

What then (will a man say) did the ordinance of the Sabbath purport? Or why, after the threatening against transgressions was a second and similar Law straightway introduced? To this we say, that it was right not only to threaten trangressors that they should undergo dreadful sufferings, nor by fear alone to stablish Israel unto piety (for the service of fear is of a more slavish sort) but to show of what they will be partakers and to what end they will come, who are firmly fixed in love to Him. He defines therefore, and gives them as in type the promise of the future good things. For the law hath a shadow of the good things to come, as it is written, and its form is shown to be an exercise preparatory to the truth. For He commands them to rest on the last day of the week, that is, the sabbath, and to cease from all work, and give it over, and to practise rest thereon, signifying thereby the rest and enjoyment that should be to the saints at the completion of ages, when they having ended their life in the world, and having cleansed away the sweat of their good works, they who are in Christ shall live the life without toil and free from all weariness, according to that which is spoken concerning them by the mouth of the prophet: for they shall forget their former tribulation, and it shall not come into their heart, but everlasting joy shall be upon their head, for upon their head praise, and joy shall take hold on them, sorrow and grief and sighing are fled away. They too imitating the Creator who ceased and all but rested from the toils of creation, will cease from their labours in this life, attaining unto the delight to be given by Christ at the end of ages. And to this end I think that the appointed rest on the sabbath tends.

But note how the Law-giver says negatively, Thou shalt not worship any other gods, but on giving the kindred commandment about the sabbath which follows it, He says, Remember, and why? Because the time for not worshipping other gods was now gone by (for therefore He immediately commanded them to be diligent about this) but by means of memory it was possible to behold things to come, and to see aforehand in thought what was already limned in types. We must moreover notice this too. For when He had well enforced our position with regard to our faith, He straightway adds the memorial of the promise at the end of ages, and then ordains the remaining laws, Honour thy father and thy mother, thou shalt not kill, and so on: that we may not think we are justified by works, nor look for the ungrudged bounteousness of God as the fruit of our own toils, but that we shall have it of faith. Therefore before the laws of godly conversation, grace hath straightway entered in as the next neighbour to our faith of the good things in hope.

The sabbath rest then signifies the life of the saints in rest and holiness, when they, having at length put off all that is troublous, and ceased from every toil, shall delight in the good things from God. And verily the blessed Paul, when he discoursed to us of these things, and most excellently essayed to enquire into the mode of the rest of the people, saith thus, And to whom sware He that they should not enter into His rest, but to them that believed not? And we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. For since certain were supposing that that was the land of rest, whereinto they came that came forth out of Egypt, albeit that is taken as a type of the one which shall be given to the saints by Christ, which David called the land of the living, the most wise Paul endeavours to show, that that which was then given for an inheritance to the children of Israel by the command of Joshua was a type of that which is looked for. For that these things are taken as a type of the truth, he diligently proves, bringing an argument demonstrative of what has been said. For he saith thus, Seeing therefore it remaineth that some enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief, He again limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To-day, after so long a time: as it is foresaid To-day if ye will hear His Voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation; for if Jesus had given them rest, then would He not afterward have spoken of another day. Seest thou how diligently he overthrew the apparent objection? For one striving with Jewish arguments might straightway have said, "What then art thou saying most excellent Sir? hath not Joshua brought the people into the land of promise? did they not rest and keep sabbath in it?" "yea." (he saith) "but in type and imitation of the true." For if in these things only the grace of God and the measure of His Promise is marked out, and in them have been fulfilled to Israel their hopes, and the letter of the law signifies nothing else besides, how, as though Joshua had not given them rest, is again another period of rest marked out by blessed David although he was so long after? Wisely then and very skilfully does he, after having shown that the historical incidents are a type and image of spiritual things, reveal the still concealed and hidden interpretation of the sabbath, adding. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God; for he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from His. How then will it not be hence at length clearly confessed, that the mind of the saints knows that the resting from toils, i. e., those of our labours, is the sabbath-keeping, when the bright band of the saints shall delight in their good deeds before wrought in this life, after the likeness of the Creator of all things, Who rested and rejoiced on the seventh day, as Wisdom saith in the book of Proverbs, I was she in Whom He delighted: daily rejoiced I before Him at every-time, when He was rejoicing on having completed the earth, and was rejoicing in the sons of men? Therefore (for I will return again to the original subject, and will recapitulate the bent of the whole discourse), the rest of the sabbath denotes the toilless life of the saints. For without toil shall all good things be given at that time to the saints by God, nor shall we then work sin the foundation of ills, because it shall perish root and branch from us, together with him |494 who was wont to sow it in us, according as it is said, No lion shall be there, nor shall ought of evil beasts go up thereon, but a pure way shall be there, and it shall be called, An holy way. Yea, and the mind of the saints will retain all good things without toil. Therefore he too who gathered sticks on the sabbath day died by stoning, as having wronged the truth in the type. For after having ceased, and arrived at that rest, we shall never go forth of that habit both admirable and illustrious in virtues, as they did from their tent, nor shall we any more collect sin, which is the food and mother of fire, as did that man the wood, through his exceeding senselessness, not understanding the types which point to the truth. Therefore also with senseless stones, as himself taken in much senselessness, was he stoned by the avengers, having the character of his manners inscribed in his punishment. That we shall not then commit any abominable sin, is therefore manifest, nor yet shall we by sweat attain what is profitable; and this again we shall see shown as it were darkly in the books of Moses. For God showered down the Manna like dew upon the sons of Israel in the wilderness, and gave them angels' bread, as it is written, and then He appointed a law too respecting it by the all wise Moses. For thus did- he make proclamation, Eat to-day: for to-day is a sabbath unto the Lord, ye shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather, but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none. For he hints that before the completion of the ages it is convenient that we collect with toil that which profiteth and nourisheth us unto everlasting life, as they traversing the wide wilderness, gathered together from all quarters manna for their food; but on the seventh, that is, in the final end, the time for collecting what is profitable is gone by, and we shall delight ourselves in the things already provided, according as it is said by the Psalmist, Thou shalt eat the fruit of thy toils.

God the Lawgiver then, not taking pleasure in the shadows, but looking beforehand to the very image of the things, issued proclamation that we ought not to labour on the sabbath. But certain men having despised the Law given them about this, and not shrinking from fool-hardily offending the Lord of all, determined that they ought to go out to gather manna even on the sabbath, and not in counsels only was their daring endeavour, but in very deed they accomplished what seemed them good. The Law-giver therefore for this again finds fault with them, and says, How long chuse ye not to keep My commandments and My law? See, for that the LORD gave you this day for a Sabbath, therefore He hath given you on the sixth day the bread of two days, abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day. Seest thou how He forming beforehand for us life free from all sweat and toil, in the typical rest, enjoins them to do nothing at all on the sabbath? For He does not permit them to. gather, and enjoins them besides, not to leave their house and go anywhither, nor to go forth from their own place. And what again He wills us to learn by this, we will set forth, bringing forward a kindred and similar command. The blessed Prophet Jeremiah spake then to the Jews on this wise, Thus saith the LORD, Keep your souls, and bear no burden on the sabbath day, and go not forth of the gates of Jerusalem, neither carry forth burdens out of your houses on the sabbath day, neither do ye any work: hallow the sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers. And what thence? Urging as aforesaid to a watchful habit, he bids us keep our own soul, for thus will oar duty of hastening unto the hoped-for Sabbath-keeping be easily accomplished. But how many good things shall be revealed to those who possess this, He beautifully makes known by the introduction of the other things. For He does not suffer any to be laden with a burden, since no one at that time will take up the heavy burden of sin. For it is the time of holiness, when our old sin having departed to utter destruction, the soul of each is renewed to a habit of virtue unwavering. Yea and He does not suffer them to go forth of the gates of Jerusalem. For according to the true and orthodox doctrine the glorious choir of the saints shall dwell securely in the heavenly Jerusalem, and shall not go forth of the holy city, but rather shall be therein for ever, held fast by the Divine power so as never to be able to run away from the good things once for all given them. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance, according to S. Paul. But in saying again, Ye shall not go forth every man from his place, He seems to imply this most clearly. For many in truth are the mansions with God the Father according to the Saviour's word (and of this was the holy tabernacle in all glory fulfilling the type, which had ten chambers) and to each shall be given according to his deserts and proportionately to his good deeds, his abode. But they that are wholly in possession of their tabernacles there, they shall dwell there for ever, and will never come to fall from the things allotted to them by the Divine free gift. And a true witness hereof shall be introduced by us. For the Prophet Isaiah having clearly stated these things, speaketh thus, Thine eyes shall see Jerusalem, a wealthy city, tabernacles that shall not be shaken nor shall be removed for ever: for in saying that the tabernacles in the wealthy city shall not be shaken, he shows the immutability of the abode and habitation therein. Yea, he says moreover, and Neither do ye any work thereon, but hallow ye the sabbath day. As we have already often said, the time of rest and refreshment belongs to both, and it is wholly kept holy as a feast to Christ.

Again that we ought to do no work on the sabbath day, but to rest as it were and cease from every thing that inviteth to sweat and toil, we shall know from other sources also. For He says in Exodus, Six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits thereof, but the seventh year thou shalt let it rest and lie still. And in Leviticus, When ye come into the land which I give you, the land which I give you shall keep a sabbath unto the LORD. Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof, but in the seventh year shall be a rest unto the land, a sabbath to the LORD. For it is not the land which is insensible to toil that He releases, nor yet to it doth He in reality give this law, but He brought it about to those who possessed it, that they should not toil, through His giving a release to the land. For in many ways did He point out our feast in Christ, in which they who have lived in the Divine fear shall hasten unto the perfect and complete liberty which is in holiness, and to the most wealthy grace of the Spirit. And this again we shall know from the Mosaic commands themselves. For it runs thus, When thy brother, an Hebrew man or an Hebrew woman, is sold unto thee, six years shall he serve thee, in the seventh year a release. For we who were of old slaves to sin, and by taking pleasure in evil had in some sort sold ourselves to the devil, being justified in Christ through faith, shall mount up to the true and holy sabbath-keeping, clothed with the liberty which is through grace, and glorified with the good things from God.

CHAPTER VII. A dissertation upon the circumcision on the eighth day, manifoldly showing of what it is significant.

Having now sufficiently (as I think) and according to the power of my understanding, unfolded the purpose of the sabbath, we will transfer the labour of investigation to circumcision which is akin thereto, resolving from all quarters to hunt out as befits, what is of use. For it were most absurd and not free from the extremest ridicule, that one should not gladly give all toil in exchange for the knowledge of these things. What then was by it also typically expressed to them of old, we considering the subject spiritually will set forth according to the measure of the gift of the God of all Who maketh dark things manifest, and openeth to us hidden and invisible treasures. For they who have already attained unto habit undefective, and have their understanding maturer, may both conceive and utter things far superior to these, but WE will set before our hearers what comes into our mind, though it seem to come far short of what is fitting, not sinning against brotherly love by fear of seeming inferior to any, but rather knowing the scripture, Give occasion to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser; teach a just man, and he will receive yet more. The first law then respecting circumcision was ordained, when God said to Abraham, THOU shalt keep My covenant and thy seed after thee in their, generations; and this is My covenant, which I will covenant, between you and Me and thy seed after thee in their generations: every man child among you shall be circumcised, and ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin: and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt Me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child. But when He had appointed the law as to this, and had decreed that they should surely circumcise the flesh of their foreskin, He shows that the transgression of the law will not be without harm, showing that it is the type of a most essential mystery: for He subjoins as follows, And My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant: and the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised on the eighth day 14 that soul shall be cut off from his seed; he hath scattered My covenant. The Divine Paul then affirmed that circumcision had been given to the patriarch as a sign and a seal of the faith which he had in uncircumcision. For it was his aim (it seems) and zealous endeavour to show that the calling and righteousness which are through faith surpass and are elder than every command of the law. For thus hardly did he shame them of Israel, and persuade them not to esteem the righteousness of faith a transgression of the law, but rather a return to that which was from the beginning and before all law; yet is he, seasonably bringing round the force of his subject to what is immediately profitable and of use for the present time, found to know of another kind of circumcision. For wishing to unteach the Jews their delight in glorying in the flesh, he writes again, For not he is a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh, but he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men but of God. Does he not hereby persuade them to change at length to other thoughts respecting this, and would not have them look on circumcision, as merely the gift of the seal to our forefather of the faith which he had being yet uncircumcised, but conceive of it as something greater and spiritual?

We must then investigate and examine not remissly what the circumcision in the spirit is, of what that which is accomplished in the flesh is a symbol, and why, not on any day indifferently, as it might happen, but only on the eighth, man is circumcised. It is then obvious to every man, that since our aim is intent to be united to God through Christ the Mediator, therefore it surely befits those who mount up by faith to intimate nearness with the all-holy Lord, to first purify and sanctify themselves in every way. We will take as a most excellent image of this kind of thing, that which was spoken by God to the holy Moses, Go down protest unto the people, and sanctify them to day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes and he ready against the third day; for the third day the LORD will come down upon the mount Sinai. In that they were to sanctify themselves beforehand, He would have them attend to fitness of habits; in that they were to wash their clothes, He points to purity of the body itself. For the body is as it were the garment and array of the soul.

Since then (for I will go up to the first and most necessary beginning of the subject) they who are hastening to an intimate nearness to the holy God must surely first purify themselves, according to what is said by Him, Holy shall ye be, for I am holy, He ordained a symbol of sanctification to them of old through the circumcision in the flesh, and how, we will say. On examining into the nature of things among us, we shall find pleasure taking the lead of all sin: and some hot lust ever preceding in its working, invites us to transgression, and first taking captive the prudence of the understanding, thus at length persuades us to come by a most smooth way unto the attainment of the things desired. And the disciple of Christ shows that what we have said on these matters is true, for thus proclaims he, Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth He any man, but every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then lust when it hath conceived, bringeth forth sin, and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Seest thou then how in lusts toward anything the birth of evil is first formed, and the seed of sin is first conceived in forbidden pleasure? God the Lawgiver then commands the circumcising steel to be applied to that part of the body, wherein and whence is the birth of pleasures, that thou mayest learn, as it were darkly, that it is impossible |501 for us ever to appear pure, unless, by receiving the most sharp working of the Divine Word in our heart, and admitting into our mind the sword of the Spirit, we drive away lusts after all the basest things, never doing after our own wills, even though they pretend to have the sweetest enjoyment, but persuaded only to love and do the Will of God. Seeing that the truer circumcision brings unto us such power, well may it be said to those who are accustomed to glory in the flesh only, Circumcise yourselves to God, and circumcise the hardness of your heart, men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem. For he that is circumcised in the flesh, is circumcised to the flesh only, but he that hath received the circumcision in the Spirit, through faith to Christward, is circumcised to God only and truly.

But we receive the circumcision in the Spirit which bringeth us up to an intimate nearness to God, on the eighth day, that is the day of the resurrection of the Saviour, taking this as a sign that the circumcision of the Spirit is the giver of Life, and agreeing in some sort through the thing itself, that we shall live with Christ, according to what is said by Paul, For ye died, and your life hath been hidden with Christ in God: when Christ shall appear, your life, then shall YE also appear with Him in glory. For will not one say (and that with truth) that one dies to the world, by refusing the world's pleasures for God's sake? Such an one did the Divine Paul too manifest himself to us, saying, God forbid that I should glory, save in the Cross of Christ, by Whom the world hath been crucified unto me, and I unto the world: for made partakers of Him through the Spirit, which circumciseth without hands all. the impurity that is in us, we become dead to the world, and live a most excellent life to God. Therefore circumcision is on the eighth day by reason of the resurrection of Christ, and not before the eighth; for not before the Resurrection was the gift of the Spirit, but after it, or at the very time of the resurrection, when He breathed on His disciples also, saying, Receive ye the Holy Ghost. To the Jews then the circumcision by the knife was more fitting, for they were yet slaves and under the avenging law (and the iron is the symbol of punishment), but to us as free and spiritual belongs the purification through the Spirit, banishing all pollution from our souls, and bringing in perfection in the brightness of godliness through faith.

For that through the truer and spiritual circumcision, is accomplished the boast of perfection in godliness, we shall perceive, by considering what is written respecting the Patriarch Abraham. It is written then of our forefather Abraham, that his years were ninety and nine in number, and then did God serviceably ordain him circumcision, making this too as it were an evident sign, that circumcision is as it were a vestibule and approach to perfection in virtue, or rather clearly signifying that no one will ever arrive at this, who has not the purification which is shadowed forth by circumcision. For the number 100 is the symbol of perfection. Circumcision then precedes perfection. For it when it precedes easily brings us to that. But not to these things are limited the benefits of circumcision, I mean of circumcision in the Spirit, but we shall find that it too belongs to those only who are free in Christ. But wholly free (I think) in Christ, is the man who hath shaken off the bondage of the devil and the yoke of sin, and hath broken asunder their bonds, as it is written, and hath bound upon him the glorious and untyrannical boast of righteousness, I mean the righteousness which is in faith of Christ.

But that we shall find circumcision on the eighth day befitting the free, but by no means those who are slaves, we on traversing the holy and Divine Scripture, shall in nowise doubt. Ishmael then, the son born to the patriarch of the handmaid Hagar, was circumcised, but not on the eighth day, but rather in his thirteenth year: for so is it written, that Abraham circumcised Ishmael his son at thirteen years old, in order that the Divine word may show us that the son of Jerusalem which is in bondage, that is Israel, hath fallen both from the eighth and from the twelfth. For it falleth from the eighth, as not choosing to receive the saving preaching of the Resurrection, which took place on the eighth day, that is the Gospel of Christ, whereby there is no doubt that we aided unto faith, are circumcised in spirit. But it falleth again from the twelfth too, as it were in figure thrusting away by their unbelief the holy choir of the Apostles, and desiring to abide entirely without taste and experience of their doctrine. Herein then is the servant, but Isaac the free son of the free is circumcised on the eighth day. For the free children of the free, I mean Jerusalem which is above, are enriched receiving the eighth, that is the Resurrection of Christ, and the circumcision in spirit which freeth them from all sin, and releaseth them from death, because from sin too, whence and on account whereof is death, and transbringeth them unto the Life of Christ.

But that in addition to what we have already said, both undoing of death and the overthrow of corruption, are found through the circumcision in the spirit, we shall easily see, by studying the book called Exodus. For the blessed Moses was sent by divine command to Pharaoh the tyrant of the Egyptians, to tell him that it behoved him to let Israel go from that great bondage. And indeed he was setting out, to meet with those things we spoke of, but it came to pass (it says) by the way in the inn, that the angel met him and sought to kill him: and Zipporah took a sharp stone and circumcised the foreskin of her son, and said, The blood of the circumcision of my son hath stayed, and he departed from him, because she said, The blood of the circumcision of my son hath stayed. Here listen to me carefully. The so-called angel seeks to lay hands upon and to slay Moses, but hardly withdraws from him and departs, shamed by the circumcision of the child, which Zipporah performing with a stone, says that she has accomplished what is necessary. For scaring away the destroyer of Moses, she cries out, The blood of the circumcision of my son hath stayed. But unless some mystical meaning were hidden in these words, what mind (tell me) would be assured, that the hierophant Moses was saved by the circumcision of his son, and that the destroyer making an onset like a wild beast desisted from his onslaught at the appearance of blood, and drew back and turned away? Then (for I will come to this point first) the benefit or glory of his own circumcision did not suffice the blessed Moses unto salvation. For I think I ought rather to speak thus. The might of the circumcision which is after the law, will not overthrow death which cometh indifferently to every one, evil and good. But the circumcision in the Spirit of the new people, that is, of those who have believed in Christ, most excellently performed by Zipporah, that is the Church, both scares it against its will, and puts it to flight when raging.

How then, may some one with great reason say, is Israel too preserved in the spiritual circumcision of the new people, though he hath no share of it? To this we say, that as far as concerns Israel's not choosing to receive the Resurrection of our Saviour Christ, death would have reigned even for ever; but since they which believed received it, the grace of the Resurrection on their accounts passed into the whole nature, extended in some sort to the whole through the circumcision in the Spirit, even though a considerable difference of resurrection be seen in the one and the other. For they who thrust from them belief in Christ, and by their unbelief insult the Giver of life, will gain power from the Resurrection merely to live again (for they will live again unto doom, not having loved Christ who justifieth), but they who are admirers of the Resurrection of the Saviour, and true keepers of the commandments, shall go forth of that land wherein they are, unto the resurrection of life, as it is written. The people then which is circumcised in spirit will transmit his own good even unto the unbelieving. For his of right is the grace of the Resurrection, but he will transmit it unto the rest also, God desiring of His skill to preserve the whole nature. For as Paul saith, as WE in times past disbelieved the mercy of Israel, that through their obedience 15 we may gain the grace through Christ, so they too have now disbelieved our mercy that they too again may obtain mercy, our Saviour Christ transmitting to them also through our faith, the benefit of the Resurrection. For the things which are due to them that believe, are more suitably given to the whole nature. Therefore the Divine Apostle Paul also revealing to us the mystery concerning the Resurrection that shall be says that Christ will rise the First fruits, for verily He also was first raised from the dead, but afterwards (he says) that they are Christ's at His coming. For he says that they who were intimately connected with Him by faith must be raised before all the rest, showing that the resurrection is strictly and properly due to them above all, even though it have reached the whole nature, God being pleased of His Goodness (that is) and Loving-kindness wholly to abolish death.

But observe how not with iron does Zipporah circumcise the child (for the iron is an avenger, and beseems them that are under the law which punisheth) but with a stone, as it is written, understood as a type of Christ. For the indestructibility and stability in all respects of the Nature of the Only-Begotten is hereby signified. Wherefore God the Father in the holy Prophets called Christ an adamant too, saying, Behold, I am setting an adamant in the midst of My people Israel. The adamant signifies to us as in a figure, that the Divine and Ineffable Nature of the Word can never yield to those which oppose it. Thus the Divine Joshua too after Moses' leadership and death being called to the command, purified the children of Israel with a Divinely appointed stone, and since he was to withstand the hand of the enemy, right well was he commanded to arm them first in some sort by circumcision, knowing that no otherwise would they who were on the very verge of fighting be above falling and superior to death.

And thus it is written concerning him, And the Lord said unto Joshua, Make thee knives of rock, of the sharp rock, and sit down, circumcise the children of Israel. And Joshua made him knives of flints, and circumcised the children of Israel. For herein the name rock signifies to us as it were the fixed and indestructible Word of God, the expression sharp points out the power of subtilely penetrating into things, and its keenest energy, since Paul too, who was nourished up in the holy and Divine writings, calls the Divine Word quick and powerful and sharper than any two edged sword, and says that it pierces even to the parting of soul and spirit. But the Word so subtle and piercing entering our hearts through His own Spirit frees them from all uncleanness, and circumcising in an expressible manner the things in respect whereof we are full of the deepest abominations, it renders us both holy and undefiled. For see herein most translucent the image of the truth. For Jesus is he who circumciseth, and they who undergo it of him, are every fresh young child, as it is written, who this day knoweth not good or evil. For they who came forth out of Egypt had the Divine wrath as the wages of their unbelief, and manifold punishment overtook them in the desert, it having been with reason determined by the all-holy God that He would not bring them into the land which He sware to their fathers. But they who came after them being free from the charges of unbelief, fulfilled the type of the new people, so as even to receive the circumcision in the spirit through Christ, the old and first people, that is, Israel, having gone to perdition, as we have just said. Nevertheless the noble and new people are circumcised, under the command of Joshua, the other side Jordan, as it is written. For the considerations that spring from the truth are thus; we shall never receive the circumcision through the Spirit in the heart, as long as we have not yet been brought over the mystic Jordan, but are still on yon side of the holy waters. But when all the people were circumcised by command of Joshua, straightway the Lawgiver makes known the utility of the thing, and says to the holy Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherein then shall we grant that Israel received benefit from circumcision or what reproach do we say was rolled away? Their bondage, their exposure from weakness to be tyrannized over, and yet more their hard labours, in clay and brick. Seest thou from how great evils the might of the circumcision in spirit delivers? For it delivers the soul of man out of the hand of the devil, renders it free and let go from the sin which tyrannizes in us, and maketh it superior to all the arrogance of wicked devils. Yea it frees from both clay and brick, for no longer does it suffer one denied with the pleasures of the flesh, nor that he be intermingled with the toils of earth, but frees both from death and corruption: nor are these all the benefits which arise from circumcision, but it also renders us partakers of the Divine Nature through the participation of our Saviour Christ.

For the compiler of the book adds to what has been said, And the children of Israel kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the month and did eat of the corn of the land bread unleavened and new. For no otherwise may one partake of the Very Lamb That taketh away the sin of the world, nor yet find the unleavened and new food of the Gospel preachings, unless one have first passed the mystic Jordan, received the circumcision from the Living Word, and rubbed off after some sort, as it were a spot on the soul, the reproach of Egypt, in the manner we have just expounded.

For that God loatheth, as fall of reproach and all uncleanness, him that is not yet circumcised, not as holding in abomination the flesh which He disdained not to create, but [as hating] him that is yet (so to say) in full vigour and complete, as respects pleasures in evil, by reason of his having lost nothing, we shall know when we find Him saying to holy Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the Passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof but every man's servant that is bought for money, thou shall circumcise him, and then shall he eat thereof. For He wholly excludes the stranger, thereby signifying him who is not yet joined to Christ through faith: but him that is in bondage to sin, and is in some sort sold to the devil, He very seasonably commands to be first circumcised, and purified, and then to taste the most holy Flesh. For we being pure purely shall we partake of Christ, according to that which is orderly proclaimed in our churches, Holy things to the holy. For in truth it were just and meet, since our Saviour Christ died for us, and cleansed us not with the purifications of the Law but with His Own Blood, that we too should offer to Him our own life and as a just debt pay that we live no more to ourselves, but repay as it were the complete consecration unto holiness of our own souls. For that the Precious Blood and Death of Christ Who died for all, both saved us from all evil, and was the Giver of the spiritual circumcision, whereby we gain that we are joined to God Who is over all, in this too shall we see. For thus it is written in respect of him who was captain after Moses, I mean Joshua the son of Nun, And it came to pass after these things, that Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the LORD, died, being an hundred and ten years old. And they buried him in the border of his inheritance: there they buried with him, in the sepulchre wherein they buried him, the knives of flints wherewith he circumcised the children of Israel. For the blessed Joshua died and was buried, and profitably were the knives affixed to the sepulchre, which ministered to the type of circumcision, that we again might understand by this that the grace of circumcision in spirit the wooer for us of all heavenly goods, is bound up in the death of our Saviour Christ.

We will then understand that the circumcision on the eighth day, taking it in no Jewish sense, is the purification through the Spirit, in faith and the Resurrection of Christ, the casting away of all sin, the destruction of death and corruption, the bestower of holiness and ownness with Christ, the image of freedom, the way and door to close friendship with God.

Abundance then of spiritual considerations then having been now contributed by us from all parts to these things, and the two chapters divided as was meet, and we having concluded for each the discussion suiting it: it remains and is due to say, why the spiritual circumcision prevails over even the honour of the sabbath. For circumcision is to be received even on the sabbath day, unheeding the Law of not working thereon. Since then the rest on the seventh day signifies freedom and rest from all wickedness, and cessation from sin, and circumcision in spirit means nothing different from these, as it were in another way (for I think that the being freed from superfluous lusts, and overmuch pleasure, clearly results in rest from evil), we shall find not only that circumcision in no way breaks the law respecting the sabbath, but even aids it and all but coincides in one and the same language with it, openly proclaiming that one ought to rest and to desist from evil: so that they both are the same, I mean both circumcision and the rest of the sabbath (as one will most rightly deem), according to the concurrence of both in one aim. For we will not adhere to the gross type of the history, but will rather spiritually go to the oracles of the Spirit. Unblameably therefore will the profit of circumcision on the sabbath too be brought in, since as the Saviour saith, The priests in the temple profane the sabbath by ministering thereon and not ceasing from their ordinary occupations, and are blameless, as the Judge Himself hath testified to them, with greatest reason. For what time is there wherein we ought to desist from works of holiness, and those wherein the Deity delighteth? at what time is it not hurtful to slacken zeal in piety? The rest then on the sabbath day hath a most praiseworthy ceasing and staying from wickedness only and from abominable sin, but by no means hinders us from taking pleasure in holy deeds, and whatsoever any one supposes will be of profit to his own soul, this too it enjoins him unblamed to take all pains rightly to perform. This same profitableness you may see introduced also in the force of circumcision. For in cutting away pleasure in the direction of evil, is perceived a birth of resting from sin, and a beginning of worship in spirit and most holy conversation; and the difference between them is slight, nevertheless a needful one. For in that He does not command both to be observed on the seventh day, nor yet on the eighth; the plan of each gives us to understand that there is a distinction. And this too has a meaning, and no inelegant one, as seems to me. For resting from wickedness is not yet the utter casting off also of wickedness. For ofttimes our passions are quiet within us, yet are not wholly cast out of our mind, but are by sober reasoning, as it were with a bridle, forcibly brought to the rest which is uncongenial to them, yea and give way even against their will to the toils of discipline also. But shaking off one's passions, as far as a man can do, is I suppose a wholly different thing and far greater than resting from passion.

Having thus arranged our arguments on these matters, we must finally consider, that we shall not attain unto the casting away of our passions or stumblings arising from pleasure, which is the meaning of circumcision, unless we first cease from sin which goes forth into action, and hold as it were in rest the motions of our mind which run unto transgression. For by using some step of this kind, we shall easily attain what is yet greater and higher, I mean the total casting off of our passions. But the rest from passion, seems to lie in some degree in our own power (for we shall cease from evil, by giving the force of our wills to what is better), but to be released from our passions is surely not in our own power, but is verily the fitting work of Christ who suffered for us, that He might remodel all to newness of life. Therefore meetly did circumcision obtain the eighth day, introducing the renewing (so to say) time of the Resurrection, while the rest had the seventh day, its neighbour and a little behind. For rest for a season and at will, falls and comes a little short of the entire cutting off of the passions.

And He said not, "I have done a thing greater than circumcision," but abundantly refuteth them by saying, "If a man receive circumcision." "Seest thou that the Law is most established when a man breaketh it? Seest thou that the breaking of the Sabbath is the keeping of the Law? that if the Sabbath were not broken, the Law must needs have been broken? so that I also have established the Law." He said not, "Ye are wroth with Me because I have wrought a thing which is greater than circumcision," but having merely mentioned what had been done, He left it to them to judge, whether entire health was not a more necessary thing than circumcision. "The Law," He saith, "is broken, that a man may receive a sign which contributeth nothing to health; are ye vexed and indignant at its being broken, that one might be freed from so grievous a disease?"

He said not, "Ye are wroth with Me because I have wrought a thing which is greater than circumcision," but having merely mentioned what had been done, He left it to them to judge, whether entire health was not a more necessary thing than circumcision. "The Law," He saith, "is broken, that a man may receive a sign which contributeth nothing to health; are ye vexed and indignant at its being broken, that one might be freed from so grievous a disease?"

"Judge not according to appearance."

What is, "according to appearance"? "Do not, since Moses hath the greatest honor among you, give your decision according to your estimation of persons, but according to the nature of things; for this is to judge rightly. Wherefore hath no one of you reproved Moses? Wherefore hath no one disobeyed him when he ordereth that the Sabbath be broken by a commandment introduced from without into the Law? He alloweth a commandment to be of more authority than his own Law; a commandment not introduced by the Law, but from without, which is especially wonderful; while ye who are not lawgivers are beyond measure jealous for the Law, and defend it. Yet Moses, who ordereth that the Law be broken by a commandment which is not of the Law, is more worthy of confidence than you." By saying then, (I have made) "a whole man (healthy)," He showeth that circumcision also was "partial" health. And what was the health procured by circumcision? "Every soul," It saith, "that is not circumcised, shall be utterly destroyed." (Gen. xvii. 14.) "But I have raised up a man not partially afflicted, but wholly undone." "Judge not," therefore, "according to appearance."

(Hom. xlix. 3) He does not say, however, I have done a greater work than circumcision; but only states the matter of fact, and leaves the judgment to them, saying, Judge not according to the appearance, but Judge righteous judgment: as if to say, Do not, because Moses has a greater name with you than I, decide by degree of personal eminence; but decide by the nature of the thing itself, for this is to judge righteously. No one however has blamed Moses for making the sabbath give place to the commandment of circumcision, which was not derived from the law, but from another source. Moses then commands the law to be broken to give effect to a commandment not of the law: and he is more worthy of credit than you.

Therefore for circumcision the sabbath was itself broken by Moses, and the sabbath day in no way prevents a man from being circumcised; even if the eighth day falls on a sabbath, the law of sabbath rest is set aside so that the law of circumcision may not be broken. If this is so, then why are you indignant and angry at Me for healing a whole man on the sabbath? On the sabbath, circumcision, which causes pain, is not forbidden; yet you reproach Me for freeing a man from disease and making him well.

Our Lord is arguing from those facts when he says: If a man receives circumcision on the sabbath day, so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you indignant with me because I healed a whole man on the sabbath?

We should note here that three things make this argument effective: two of these are explicit, and the other implied. First, although the command given to Abraham [about circumcision] was the first to be given, it was not canceled by the command given to Moses concerning observing the sabbath. "I say that the covenant, confirmed by God, is not canceled by the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later" (Gal 3:17). And so Christ is arguing from this: Although when dealing with human laws, the later ones cancel the earlier laws, in the case of divine laws, the earlier ones have greater authority. And so the command given to Moses about observing the sabbath does not cancel the command which was given to Abraham concerning circumcision. Therefore, much less does it interfere with me, who am only doing what was decided by God before the creation of the world, for the salvation of mankind; and this salvation was symbolized by the sabbath.

Another point is that the Jews were commanded not to work on the sabbath; yet they did do things that were related to the salvation of the individual. So Christ is saying: If you people, who were commanded not to work on the sabbath, circumcise on that day (and this concerns the salvation of the individual, and thus it was done to an individual organ) and you do this so that the law of Moses may not be broken (from which it is clear that those things that pertain to salvation should not be omitted on the sabbath), it follows with greater reason that a man should do on that day those things that pertain to the salvation of everyone. Therefore, you should not be indignant with me because I healed a whole man on the sabbath.

The third point is that each command was a symbol: for "all these things happened to them in symbol" (1 Cor 10:11). Thus, if one symbol, i.e., the command to observe the sabbath, does not cancel the other symbol, i.e., the command to circumcise, much less does it cancel the truth. For circumcision symbolized our Lord, as Augustine says.

Finally, he says, a whole man, because, since God's works are perfect, the man was cured so as to be healthy in body, and he believed so as to be healthy in soul.

But it is the duty of the bishop to judge rightly, as it is written, "Judge righteous judgment;" and elsewhere, "Why do ye not even of yourselves judge what is right?" Be ye therefore as skilful dealers in money: for as these reject bad money, but take to themselves what is current, in the same manner it is the bishop's duty to retain the unblameable, but either to heal, or, if they be past cure, to cast off those that are blameworthy, so as not to be hasty in cutting off, nor to believe all accusations; for it sometimes happens that some, either through passion or envy, do insist on a false accusation against a brother, as did the two elders in the case of Susanna in Babylon, and the Egyptian woman in the case of Joseph. Do thou therefore, as a man of God, not rashly receive such accusations, lest thou take away the innocent and slay the righteous; for he that will receive such accusations is the author of anger rather than of peace.

"Judge not according to personal appearance, but judge righteous judgment." What is this? Just now, you who by the law of Moses circumcise on the Sabbath-day are not angry with Moses; and because I made a man whole on the Sabbath-day you are angry with me. You judge by the person; give heed to the truth. I do not prefer myself to Moses, says the Lord, who was also the Lord of Moses. So consider us as you would two men, as both men; judge between us, but judge a true judgment; do not condemn him by honoring me, but honor me by understanding him. For this He said to them in another place: "If ye believed Moses ye would certainly believe me also, for he wrote of me." But in this place He willed not to say this, Himself and Moses being as it were placed before these men for judgment. Because of Moses' law you circumcise, even when it happens to be the Sabbath-day, and will ye not that I should show the beneficence of healing during the Sabbath? For the Lord of circumcision and the Lord of the Sabbath is the same who is the Author of health; and they are servile works that ye are forbidden to do on the Sabbath; if ye really understand what servile works are, ye sin not. For he that committeth sin is the servant of sin. Is it a servile work to heal a man on the Sabbath-day? Ye do eat and drink (to infer somewhat from the admonition of our Lord Jesus Christ, and from His words); at any rate, why do ye eat and drink on the Sabbath, but because that what ye do pertains to health? By this ye show that the works of health are not in any wise to be omitted on the Sabbath. Therefore "do not judge by person, but judge righteous judgment." Consider me as ye would a man; consider Moses as a man: if ye will judge according to the truth, ye will condemn neither Moses nor me; and when ye know the truth ye will know me, because I am the Truth.

It requires great labor in this world, brethren, to get clear of the vice which the Lord has noted in this place, so as not to judge by appearance, but to keep right judgment. The Lord, indeed, admonished the Jews, but He warned us also; them He convicted, us He instructed; them He reproved, us He encouraged. Let us not imagine that this was not said to us, simply because we were not there at that time. It was written, it is read; when it was recited we heard it; but we heard it as said to the Jews; let us not place ourselves behind ourselves and watch Him reproving enemies, while we ourselves do that which the truth may reprove in us. The Jews indeed judged by appearance, but for that reason they belong not to the New Testament, they have not the kingdom of heaven in Christ, nor are joined to the society of the holy angels; they sought earthly things of the Lord; for a land of promise, victory over enemies, fruitfulness of child-bearing, increase of children, abundance of fruit,-all which things were indeed promised to them by God, the True and the Good, promised to them, however, as unto carnal men,-all these things made for them the Old Testament. What is the Old Testament? The inheritance, as it were, belonging to the old man. We have been renewed, have been made a new man, because He who is the new man has come. What is so new as to be born of a virgin? Therefore, because there was not in Him what instruction might renew, because He had no sin, there was given Him a new origin of birth. In Him a new birth, in us a new man. What is a new man? A man renewed from oldness. Renewed unto what? Unto desiring heavenly things, unto longing for things eternal, unto earnestly seeking the country which is above and fears no foe, where we do not lose a friend nor fear an enemy; where we live with good affection, without any want; where no longer any advances, because none fails; where no man is born, because no man dies; where there is no hungering nor thirsting; where immortality is fullness, and truth our aliment. Having these promises, and pertaining to the New Testament, and being made heirs of a new inheritance, and co-heirs of the Lord Himself, we have a far different hope from theirs: let us not judge by appearance, but hold right judgment.

Who is he that judges not according to the person? He that loves equally. Equal love causes that persons be not accepted. It is not when we honor men in diverse measure according to their degrees that we ought to fear lest we are accepting persons. For where we judge between two, and at times between relations, sometimes it happens that judgment has to be made between father and son; the father complains of a bad son, or the son complains of a harsh father; we regard the honor which is due to the father from the son; we do not make the son equal to the father in honor, but we give him preference if he has a good cause: let us regard the son on an equality with the father in the truth, and thus shall we bestow the honor due, so that equity destroy not merit. Thus we profit by the words of the Lord, and that we may profit, we are assisted by His grace.

(Tr. xxx. s. 7) What our Lord here tells us to avoid, in judging by the person, is very difficult in this world not to do. His admonition to the Jews is an admonition to us as well; for every sentence which our Lord uttered, was written for us, and is preserved to us, and is read for our profit. Our Lord is above; but our Lord, as the truth, is here as well. The body with which He rose can be only in one place, but His truth is diffused every where. Who then is he who judges not by the person? He who loves all alike. For it is not the paying men different degrees of honour according to their situation, that will make us chargeable with accepting persons. There may be a case to decide between father and son: we should not put the son on an equality with the father in point of honour; but, in respect of truth, if he have the better cause, we should give him the preference; and so give to each their due, that justice do not destroy desertd.

"Do not judge according to appearance," accepting the human face. Concerning the good judge, Isaiah eleven: "He shall not judge according to the sight of the eyes, nor reprove according to the hearing of the ears." "But judge a just judgment," according to merits, not according to the appearance of persons. Augustine: "He does not judge with partiality who loves equally." And because they loved unequally, because they cared more about external things, therefore they judged unjustly; whence it is said in Matthew twenty-three: You Pharisees "cleanse what is on the outside"; and they justified themselves before men: Luke sixteen: "You are they who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts."

The Law (He says) which ye are so zealous to take the part of, and for the sake of which ye were kindled even unto fierce wrath, openly cries aloud, Ye shall not respect persons in judgment, for the judgment is God's. Ye then who condemn Me as a transgressor on account of the sabbath, and decide that it is most fitting to be angry at this, do ye care for the honour of the Law, take shame at the message, Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. For if ye put Moses forth from transgression, and rightly consider that he has no portion of condemnation for this, albeit he breaketh the ordinance of the sabbath on account of circumcision [which is] of the fathers, do ye free from blame the Son too Who ever agreeth with the mind of the Father, and approveth His will, and whatsoever things He doeth, these likewise is He too wont to do. But if ye condemn the Son only, and do not condemn Moses, although he is involved (He saith) in equal blame to that wherein ye suppose that I too am involved on account of the sabbath, how will ye not be found to be trampling on the Divine Law, and be taken insulting the decrees from above, out of respect to some corrupting the command to judge righteousness, and rendering superior to the Divine commands him to whom ye transgressing pay reverence from respect of persons?

Let the wise hearer observe again the wondrous skill of our Saviour Christ. When accused of the breach of one Law, He convicts them as transgressors by very many arguments, all but uttering the Gospel words. And why lookest thou at the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? An evil thing then is it to condemn others. For wherein a man judgeth another, he condemneth himself, as it is written. Wherefore by the Saviour too Himself was it said, Judge not and ye shall not be judged, condemn not and ye shall not be condemned. And this we say in respect of ourselves: for Christ will never become a transgressor by changing His own Laws to whatsoever He will, and overlaying with the fair beauty of truth the shadows of the Law: that at length, the things enjoined in a more carnal sense to them of old, may be changed into a spiritual interpretation.

It is sometimes made an objection, for instance, to a juror that he has formed some prima-facie opinion upon a case: if he can be forced under sharp questioning to admit that he has formed such an opinion, he is regarded as manifestly unfit to conduct the inquiry. Surely this is unsound. ... We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end. We say that the juryman is not a juryman because he has brought in a verdict. We say that the judge is not a judge because he gives judgment. We say that the sincere believer has no right to vote, simply because he has voted.

"Judge not according to appearance." What is, "according to appearance"? "Do not, since Moses hath the greatest honor among you, give your decision according to your estimation of persons, but according to the nature of things; for this is to judge rightly. Wherefore hath no one of you reproved Moses? Wherefore hath no one disobeyed him when he ordereth that the Sabbath be broken by a commandment introduced from without into the Law? He alloweth a commandment to be of more authority than his own Law; a commandment not introduced by the Law, but from without, which is especially wonderful; while ye who are not lawgivers are beyond measure jealous for the Law, and defend it. Yet Moses, who ordereth that the Law be broken by a commandment which is not of the Law, is more worthy of confidence than you." By saying then, (I have made) "a whole man (healthy)," He showeth that circumcision also was "partial" health. And what was the health procured by circumcision? "Every soul," It saith, "that is not circumcised, shall be utterly destroyed." (Gen. xvii. 14.) "But I have raised up a man not partially afflicted, but wholly undone." "Judge not," therefore, "according to appearance."

"Do not judge by appearances," that is, judge righteously and impartially. Moses, who violates the Sabbath through circumcision, you free from blame; but Me, who violated the Sabbath through a good deed to a man, you condemn. To free Moses from blame, out of respect for his dignity, and to condemn Me, Who in appearance am without glory — this is obvious partiality.

Then when he says, Judge not by the appearances, but with a just judgment, he guides them to a fair consideration of himself, so that they do not judge him according to appearances, but give a judgment which is just. There are two ways in which one is said to judge according to appearances. First, a judge may reach his decision relying on the allegations: "Men see the things that are evident" (1 Kgs 15:7). But this way can lead to error; thus he says, Judge not by the appearances, i.e., by what is immediately evident, but examine the matter diligently: "I diligently investigated the stranger's cause" (Jb 29:16); "He will not judge by appearances" (Is 11:3). In the second way, Judge not by the appearances, i.e., do not show partiality or favoritism in your judgment: for all judges are forbidden to do this. "You will not show favoritism when judging a person who is poor" (Ex 23:6); "You have shown partiality in your judgment" (Mal 2:9). To show partiality in a judgment is not to give a judgment that is just because of love, or deference, or fear, or the status of a person, which things have nothing to do with the case. So he says: Judge not by the appearances, but with a just judgment, as if to say: Just because Moses is more honored among you than I am, you should not base your decision on our reputations, but on the nature of the facts: because the things I am doing are greater than what Moses did.

But it should be noted, according to Augustine, that one who loves all equally does not judge with partiality. For when we honor men differently according to their rank, we must beware of showing partiality.

The Lord introduces two opinions about himself: (1) that they know where he comes from, since his mother is Mary; and (2) that he has something they do not know, since he is and has come from God. Therefore, he would not be a presumptuous person or a self-appointed teacher but had rather arrived at his teaching because God the Father sent him. Moreover, God who had sent him was not known to them because they kept themselves as far apart as possible from the God of true knowledge inasmuch as they revolted from his purpose and deeds. It is quite reasonable that he would know the Father, since he himself was with him. One knows one's relatives and household best.

Hear, therefore, the word of the Lord, brethren; see how He confirmed to them both what they said, "We know this man whence he is," and also what they said, "When Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is. Then cried Christ in the temple, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but He that sent me is true, whom ye know not." That is to say, ye both know me, and ye know me not; ye both know whence I am, and ye know not whence I am. Ye know whence I am: Jesus of Nazareth, whose parents also ye knew. For in this case, the birth of the Virgin alone was hidden, to whom, however, her husband was witness; for the same was able faithfully to declare this, who was also able as a husband to be jealous. Therefore, this birth of the Virgin excepted, they knew all that in Jesus pertains to man: His face was known, His country was known, His family was known; where He was born was to be known by inquiry. Rightly then did He say, "Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am," according to the flesh and form of man which He bore; but according to His divinity, "And I am not come of myself, but He that sent me is true, whom ye know not;" but yet that ye may know Him, believe on Him whom He has sent, and ye will know Him. For, "No man has seen God at any time, except the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him:" and, "None knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."

He confutes these objectors concerning Christ's generation, showing his twofold generation: temporal, which they knew, and eternal, which he himself knew. On account of the temporal he says: "Jesus therefore cried out, teaching in the temple," so as to astonish those who were murmuring; whence Proverbs 1: "Wisdom cries aloud outside, she utters her voice in the streets"; because he teaches openly and freely; Isaiah 58: "Cry aloud, do not cease, lift up your voice like a trumpet." "And saying: You both know me and know whence I am," according to his temporal generation; whence Matthew 13: "His mother is called Mary"; and they knew this, that he was a man and that he was born of Mary; this was said according to his temporal generation. But as regards his eternal generation, he says that he is from another, whom they do not know; on account of which he says: "And I have not come of myself," in which is noted the procession from the Father; "but he is true who sent me," because he is God; for God is truthful, but every man is a liar, according to that saying of the Psalm, "Every man is a liar"; Numbers 23: "God is not as a man, that he should lie." "Whom you do not know;" above in chapter 5: "The Father who sent me has borne witness concerning me; you have neither heard his voice nor seen his form."

It is asked concerning what he says: "Jesus cried out," etc.; because it is said in Isaiah 42: "He will not cry out, and his voice will not be heard outside."

I respond: There is the cry of impatience and contention, and of this Isaiah understands; and there is the cry of affectionate preaching, and so it is taken here.

It is also asked concerning what he says: "You know me." To the contrary: Below in chapter eight: "If you knew me, you would know my Father also;" therefore they did not know him.

I respond: There was a twofold knowledge of Christ: one through exterior sense, such as that he was a man and born in such a town and from such a parent — this they knew; the other through interior revelation, which concerned the invisible Divinity; and by this indeed they did not know him; and concerning this it is said in John chapter eight.

Jesus therefore cried teaching in the temple and saying, Ye both know Me and know whence I am.

As the men of Jerusalem were gently whispering those things one to another (for they durst not speak openly for fear of the Jews, as it is written) Christ again in God-befitting way receives knowledge of the things spoken. But since He was considering that it were fit to profit those men, He immediately shows the God-befitting Energy that is in Him, and clearly reveals to them that He has knowledge of all things. For He lifts up His cry on high, albeit before time not used to do so, and convicts them again of not having any certain understanding of the Divinely-inspired Scripture, and makes what is secret and has scarcely passed the mouth the basis of His Discourse. Next from those very things from which they foolishly supposed that they ought not to believe Him does He persuade them outright that they ought to believe: such is the pregnant meaning of what He says. Ye marvel (He says) and that most justly, that Power truly God-befitting is in Me, easily taming the purpose of the Jews, murderous though it be: for they seek to kill Me, as ye have truly and accurately remarked, and are putting forth all their diligence to that end. But (He says) when I should be fleeing, and getting Me as far off as possible from those who think it right to kill Me, I caring not a whit for their mad folly, on the contrary speak boldly and convict those who break the Law by not choosing to judge just judgment, and I suffer nothing at all. For they who of old were fierce forbear against their will, and this not the fruit of their own free choice, but the effect of My Authority. For I do not suffer them, although madly raging, and whetted unto inhuman wrath, to dare before the time their murderous purpose towards Me. At these things then (He saith) ye have been most reasonably astonished, and say that the rulers know of a truth that I am the Christ. And ye, following out suitable reasoning herein, turning away to the oracles of Divine Scripture, when ye ought rather to have been benefited therefrom, confirmed in your conception of Me, on the contrary ye were offended. For from your merely knowing whence I am, and of whom I am born, ye have decided (He saith) that I am not the Christ. Know therefore, that ye both know Me and know whence I am, that is the Divinely-inspired Scripture has given you both to know Me and whence I am. And not because ye know (may be) that I am of Nazareth or Bethlehem, and that I am born of a woman, ought ye therefore to admit the disease of unbelief; but from those things that are spoken of Me, and because of My Birth after the Flesh, ought ye the rather to advance to the apprehension of the Mysteries respecting Me, and |520 not to turn aside merely at a single voice of a Prophet, who is telling My Ineffable Generation from God the Father.

And of Myself I am not come, but He is true That sent Me.

Under the guise of defence He finds fault with the Jews who were insulting through long unbelief. With no slight skill then He composing His Discourse, by every means contrives not to seem to excite His hearers by any occasion to reasonable displeasure, but veiling His words in obscurity, He beguiles their excess of anger and draws off the edge of their passion. Why then (He says) do they, when I have often explained and openly cried out that I am sent by God the Father, still disbelieve, and because they know His Birth after the Flesh, say that He is not He Who was fore-heralded by the Law and fore-declared by the holy Prophets, and well nigh meet Him with the words: Thou utterest lies O Sir, coming to us, according to Thine Own Will, and dost Thou not blush feigning the Name of the Father? Repelling therefore this accusation of theirs as to this too, He mingles reproof with His defence, and most excellently says, Of Myself I am not come, but Se is True That sent Me. For it is your custom (He saith) O ye who dare all things with ease, and advance heedlessly to all, even the most heinous actions, sometimes to prophesy falsely, and though God hath not sent you, to say that ye are sent by God. But I am not like you, nor yet will I imitate your well-practised villany. I am not come of Myself, nor Mine Own messenger, like you, but I am come from Heaven: True is He That sent Me, not like your lie-loving sender, the devil, whose spirit ye receiving are bold too to prophesy falsely. True then is He That sent Me, but he that stirred you up to invent words from God, is not true. For he is a liar, and the father of liars. But that we shall find the Jews accustomed to prophesy lies, we shall see without any trouble from the words of the Prophets. For most plainly doth the Lord of all say of them, I sent not the prophets, yet they ran, I spake not to them, and they prophesied. And again in Jeremiah, The prophets prophesy lies in My Name, I sent them not and spake not to them and commanded them not; for visions and divinations and prophecies of their own heart do they prophesy unto you. The arrogant Jew then is reproved for this that he fastened upon Christ his own boldness against God, i. e., false prophecy. For the utter disbelief in Him Who cries that He is sent from God, even the Father, what else is it save openly to cry out, Thou prophesiest falsely, imitating our practices against ourselves?

No one knows the Father; the Son often assures us of this. The reason why he says that no one knows him but himself is because he is from the Father. Is it, I ask, as the result of an act of creation or of a genuine birth that he is from him? If it is an act of creation, then all created things are from God. How then is it that none of them know the Father, when the Son says that the reason why he has this knowledge is that he is from him? If he is created, not born, we shall observe in him a resemblance to other beings who are from God. Since all, on this supposition, are from God, why is he not as ignorant of the Father as the others are? But if this knowledge of the Father is peculiar to him who is from the Father, must not this circumstance also be peculiar to him, that is, that he is from the Father? That is, must he not be the true Son born from the nature of God? For the reason why he alone knows God is because he alone is from God. You observe, then, a knowledge that is peculiar to himself, resulting from a birth that also is peculiar to himself. You recognize that it is not by an act of creative power but through a true birth that he is from the Father. And you realize that this is why he alone knows the Father who is unknown to all other beings that are from him.

(de Trin. ult. med.) Every man, ever born in the flesh, is in a certain sense from God. How then could He say that they were ignorant who He was, and whence He wasa? Because our Lord is here referring to His own peculiar birth from God, which they were ignorant of, because they did not know that He was the Son of God. His very saying then that they did not know whence He was, was telling them whence He was. If they did not know whence He was, He could not be from nothing; for then there would be no whence to be ignorant of. He must therefore be from God. And then not knowing whence He is, was the reason that they did not know who He is. He does not know the Son who does not know His birth from the Father.

"Ye both know Me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true, whom ye know not." And again, "If ye had known Me, ye should have known My Father also." How then saith He, that they both "know Him," and "whence He is," and then, "that they neither know Him, nor the Father"? He doth not contradict, (away with the thought,) but is very consistent with Himself. For He speaketh of a different kind of knowledge, when He saith, "ye know not"; as when He saith, "The sons of Eli were wicked sons, they knew not the Lord"; and again, "Israel doth not know Me." So also Paul saith, "They profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him." It is therefore possible, "knowing," "not to know." This then is what He saith: "If ye know Me, ye know that I am the Son of God." For the "whence I am" doth not here denote place. As is clear from what followeth, "I am not come of Myself, but He that sent Me is true, whom ye know not," referring here to the ignorance shown by their works.

"I know Him," He saith, "for I am from Him, and He hath sent Me." Seest thou how He continually seeketh to prove the, "I am not come of Myself," and, "He that sent Me is true," striving not to be thought an enemy of God? And observe how great is the profit of the humility of His words.

Since they were saying that they knew Him, where He was from, with no other purpose than to show that He was from the earth and the son of a carpenter, He therefore leads them up to heaven, saying: "You both know Me, and you know where I am from," that is, although out of your malice you conceal it, yet you know that I am from heaven. For if My Father is from there, it is evident that I Myself am also from there and that I was sent by the One Who is true. For the True One would not wish to send a deceiver and a liar. But you do not know the One Who sent Me, you do not acknowledge Him by your deeds. For even in knowledge there can be ignorance, as the Apostle Paul says: "They profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him." (Titus 1:16) And you, Jews, do not know My Father because of your evil deeds and your exceedingly evil intention.

Then he shows his origin. First, he shows in what sense his origin is known, and in what sense it is not known; in the second place, he shows how we can acquire a knowledge of his origin (v 29). He does two things about the first. First, he shows what they knew about his origin; secondly, what they did not know about it (v 28b).

They did know the origin of Jesus; and so he says of Jesus that he cried out. Now a cry comes from some great emotion. Sometimes it indicates the upheaval of a soul in interior distress; and in this sense it does not apply to Christ: "He will not cry out" (Is 42:2); "The words of the wise are heard in silence" (Ecc 9:17). Sometimes it implies great devotion, as in, "In my trouble I cried to the Lord" (Ps 119:1). And sometimes, along with this, it signifies that what is to be said is important, as in, "The Seraphim cried to each other and said: 'Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God of hosts'" (Is 6:3); and in, "Does not wisdom cry out?" (Prv 8:1). This is the way preachers are encouraged to cry out: "Cry out, do not stop! Raise your voice like a trumpet" (Is 58:1). This is the way Christ cried out here, teaching in the temple.

And he said: You do indeed know me, according to appearances, and you know where I come from, that is, as to my bodily existence: "After this he was seen on earth" (Bar 3:38). For they knew that he was born from Mary in Bethlehem, and brought up in Nazareth; but they did not know about the virgin birth, and that he had been conceived through the Holy Spirit, as Augustine says. With the exception of the virgin birth, they knew everything about Jesus that pertained to his humanity.

They did not know his hidden origin; and so he says: And I have not come of my own accord. First, he gives his origin; and secondly, he shows that it is hidden from them.

His origin is from the Father, from eternity. And so he says: I have not come of my own accord, as if to say: Before I came into the world through my humanity, I existed according to my divinity: "Before Abraham came to be, I am" (below 8:58). For he could not have come unless he already was. And although I have come, I have not come of my own accord, because the Son is not of himself, but from the Father. "I came from the Father and have come into the world" (below 16:28). Indeed, his origin was foretold by the Father, who promised to send him: "I beg you, O Lord, send him whom you are going to send" (Ex 4:13); "I will send them a Savior and a defender, to free them" (Is 19:20). And so he says: the one who sent me is truthful, as if to say: I have not come from another but from him who promised and kept his promise, as he is truthful: "God is truthful" (Rom 3:4). Consequently, he teaches me to speak the truth, because I have been sent by one who is truthful. But they do not know this, because they do not know him who sent me; and so he says: whom you do not know.

But since every man, although born in a bodily condition, is from God, it seems that Christ could say that he is from God; and consequently, that they do know where he comes from. I answer, according to Hilary, that the Son is from God in a different way than others: for he is from God in such a way that he is also God; and so God is his consubstantial principle. But others are from God, but in such a way that they are not from him. Thus, it is not known where the Son is from because the nature from which he is, is not known. But where men are from is not unknown: for if something exists from nothing, where it is from cannot be unknown.

Lastly, when He had said, "But He that sent me is true, whom ye know not," in order to show them whence they might know that which they did not know, He subjoined, "I know Him." Therefore seek from me to know Him. But why is it that I know Him? "Because I am from Him, and He sent me." Gloriously has He shown both. "I am from Him," said He; because the Son is from the Father, and whatever the Son is, He is of Him whose Son He is. Hence we say that the Lord Jesus is God of God: we do not say that the Father is God of God, but simply God: and we say that the Lord Jesus is Light of Light; we do not say that the Father is Light of Light, but simply Light. Accordingly, to this belongs that which He said "I am from Him." But as to my being seen of you in the flesh, "He sent me." When thou hearest "He sent me," do not understand a difference of nature to be meant, but the authority of Him that begets.

(Tr. xxxi. 4) Lastly, to show whence they could get to know Him (who had sent Him), He adds, I know Him: so if you would know Him, enquire of Me. No one knoweth the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him. And if I should say, I know Him not, I should be a liar like unto you. (c. 8:55)

(Tr. xxxi. 4) I am from Him, He says, i. e. as the Son from the Father: but that you see Me in the flesh is because He hath sent Me. Wherein understand not a difference of nature, but the authority of a father.

"But I know him, and if I should say that I do not know him, I would be like you, a liar;" you who lie saying that you are ignorant of his temporal birth; but I do not lie so as to say that I do not know his eternal generation. "For I know him, because I am from him, and he sent me;" as the Son knows the Father; Matthew 11: "No one knows the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him." "I know him," through manifest knowledge; above in chapter 1: "No one has seen God" etc. "I am from him," through generation; below in chapter 16: "I came forth from the Father and have come into the world." "And he sent me," through the incarnation; Isaiah 61: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me" etc.

Ye have just said (He saith) When Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence He is. But since ye insist that ye hold this your opinion rightly, as being the truth, I agree to your words herein. For True is He of Whom I am, the Father, but He is not known of you. Since then (He says) ye search into the Mystery respecting Me in a manner most unadvised, but as is pleasing to yourselves, and from knowing Who and whence I am after the Flesh, dismiss from yourselves the duty of believing, do ye for this sole cause receive the faith, when ye find that ye understand not whence I am: for I am of the Father, Whom YE know not, since ye know not Him That is of Him, in Whom Alone the Father is to be seen. For he that hath seen the Son hath seen the Father, and he that knoweth the Son is not ignorant of Him that begat. All their quibbling therefore being by this taken from them, they are again taken in their malice, finding no longer any excuse for their unbelief, who have thrust away the knowledge through their own stubbornness, that that may be found true which is written, Ye see often and ye kept not, your ears opened and ye heard not. But since He was occupied upon the words of the Jews, that when Christ cometh no man knoweth whence He is, withdrawing Himself of necessity, as God, from the company of things originate, and from all else to whom the title no man may reasonably be applied, showing that He is Other by Nature, He says that He is not as they are, ignorant of His Own Father, but affirmed that He knows in all exactness both Himself and Him. For He is God of God the Father, possessed of a certain wondrous and strange knowledge of these things, as befitteth Himself Alone. For not in like manner as we know, in the same doth the Son know the Father. For the nature of things originate attaineth to the sight of God by conception only, and not overpassing the bounds which befit it, doth even against its will yield to the Divine Nature, the being veiled in ineffable words. But the Only Begotten of God the Father, vieweth Whole in Himself Him That begat Him, and pourtraying the Essence of the Father in His Own Nature, knoweth Him, in a way impossible to tell: for unutterable are the things of God.

Every person is born in the flesh; yet does not universal consciousness make every person spring from God? How then can Christ assert that either he or the source of his being is unknown? He can do so only by assigning his immediate parentage to the ultimate author of existence. And, when he has done this, he can demonstrate their ignorance of God by their ignorance of the fact that he is the Son of God.… Now he who came is not the author of his own being; but he who sent him is true whom the blasphemers do not know. He it was who sent him; and they do not know that he was the sender. Thus the sent one is from the sender; from him whom they do not know as his author. The reason why they do not know who Christ is, is that they do not know from whom he is. None can confess the Son who deny that he was born; none can understand that he was born who has formed the opinion that Jesus is from nothing. And indeed Jesus is so far from being made out of nothing that the heretics cannot tell from where he is.

[Jesus says this] to debar heresy from the violent assumption that his being from God dates from the time of his advent. The gospel revelation of the mystery proceeds in a logical sequence. First he is born, then he is sent. Similarly, in the previous declaration, we were told of ignorance, first as to who he is and then as to from where he is. For the words "I am from him, and he sent me" contain two separate statements, as also do the words "You know me, and you know where I am from."

(vi. de Trin. ultra med.) I ask however, does the being from Him express a work of creation, or a birth by generation? If a work of creation, then every thing which is created is from Him. And how then does not all creation know the Father, if the Son knows Him, because He is from Him? But if the knowledge of the Father is peculiar to Him, as being from Him, then the being from Him is peculiar to Him also; i. e. the being the true Son of God by nature. So you have then a peculiar knowledge springing from a peculiar generation. To prevent however any heresy applying the being from Him, to the time of His advent, He adds, And He hath sent Me: thus preserving the order of the Gospel sacrament; first announcing Himself born, and then sent.

"I know Him," for knowing Him, neither evil intention nor deeds contrary to Him hinder Me. "Because I am from Him," that is, from Him, not from another essence, not foreign to Him. "And He sent Me." Here two natures in Christ are clearly indicated: by the words "I am from Him" – the divine Nature, and by the words "and He sent Me" – the human. For the Son of God is called an Envoy, as well as a Servant of God, according to His humanity.

Then when he says, I know him, he teaches us how to know him from whom he is. For if a thing is to be learned, it must be learned from one who knows it. But only the Son knows the Father. And so he says: If you wish to know him who sent me, you must acquire this knowledge from me, because I alone know him. First, he shows that he knows him; secondly, he shows the perfection of his knowledge; and thirdly, the nature of his knowledge.

He shows that he knows him when he says, I know him. Now it is true that "All men see him" (Jb 36:25), but they do not see him in the same way, for in this life we see him through the intermediary of creatures: "The invisible things of God are clearly known through the things that have been made" (Rom 1:20). Thus we read: "Now we see in a mirror, in an obscure manner" (1 Cor 13:12). But the angels and the blessed in heaven see him through his essence: "Their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven" (Mt 18:10); "We shall see him as he is" (1 Jn 3:2). The Son of God, on the other hand, sees him in a more excellent way than all, that is, with a comprehensive or all-inclusive vision: "No one has ever seen God," i.e., in a comprehensive way; "it is the Only Begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, who has made him known" (above 1:18); "No one knows the Father but the Son" (Mt 11:27). It is of this vision that he is speaking of here, when he says: I know him, with a comprehensive knowledge.

He shows the perfection of his knowledge when he says: And if I were to say that I do not know him, I would be like you, a liar. This is mentioned for two reasons. Intellectual creatures do know God, though from a distance and imperfectly, for "All men see him, from a distance" (Jb 36:25). For divine truth transcends all our knowledge: "God is greater than our hearts" (1 Jn 3:20). Therefore, whoever knows God can say without lying: "I do not know him," because he does not know him to the full extent that he is knowable. But the Son knows God the Father most perfectly, just as he knows himself most perfectly. Thus he cannot say: I do not know him.

Again, because our knowledge of God, especially that which comes through grace, can be lost—"They forgot God, who saved them" (Ps 105:21)—men can say, I do not know him, as long as they are in this present life: because no one knows whether he deserves love or hatred. The Son, on the other hand, has a knowledge of the Father that cannot be lost; so he cannot say: I do not know him.

We should understand, I would be like you, as a reverse likeness. For they would not be lying if they said they did not know God; but they would be if they said that they did know him, since they did not know him. But if Christ said that he did not know him, he would be lying, since he did know him. So the meaning of this statement is this: If I were to say that I do not know him, then since I really do know him, I would be like you, a liar, who say that you know him, although you do not.

Could not Christ have said: I do not know him? It seems he could, since he could have moved his lips and said the words. And so he could have lied. I reply that Christ did say this and still was not lying. We should explain it this way: If he were to say, I do not know him, declaratively, meaning, "I believe in my heart what I profess by my lips," then he would have been a liar. Now to say as the truth what is false comes from two defects: from a defect of knowledge in the intellect; and Christ could not have this since he is the wisdom of God (1 Cor 1:30); or it could come from a defect of right will in the affections; and this could not be in Christ either since he is the power of God, according to the same text. Thus he could not say the words I do not know him, declaratively. Yet this entire conditional statement is not false, although both its parts are impossible.

The reason for this singular and perfect knowledge of Christ is given when he says: I do know him, because I am from him, and he sent me. Now all knowledge comes about through some likeness, since nothing is known except insofar as there is a likeness of the known in the knower. But whatever proceeds from something has a likeness to that from which it proceeds; and so, all who truly know have a varied knowledge of God according to the different degrees of their procession from him. The rational soul has a knowledge of God insofar as it participates in a likeness to him in a more imperfect way than other intellectual creatures. An angel, because it has a more explicit likeness to God, being a stamp of resemblance, knows God more clearly. But the Son has the most perfect likeness to the Father, since he has the same essence and power as he does; and so he knows him most perfectly, as was said. And so he says: But I do know him, that is, to the extent that he is knowable. And the reason for this is because I am from him, having the same essence with him through consubstantiality. Thus, just as he knows himself perfectly through his essence, so I do know him perfectly through the same essence. And so that we do not understand these words as referring to his being sent into this world, he at once adds, and he sent me. Consequently, the statement, I am from him, refers to his eternal generation, through which he is consubstantial with the Father. But then when he says, and he sent me, he is saying that the Father is the author of the incarnation: "God sent his Son, made from a woman, made under the law" (Gal 4:4). Now just as the Son has a perfect knowledge of the Father because he is from the Father, so because the soul of Christ is united to the Word in a unique way, it has a unique and more excellent knowledge of God than other creatures, although it does not comprehend him. And so Christ can say, according to his human nature: I know him in a more excellent way than other creatures do, but without comprehending him.