3 Saturday after Theophany

Abel knew how to divide when he offered a sacrifice from "the firstlings of his flock," teaching that the gifts of the earth, which had degenerated in the sinner, will not please God. But those in which the grace of the divine mystery shone forth will please him. And so he prophesied that we were to be redeemed from fault through the passion of the Lord, of whom it is written: "Here is the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world." Thus, too, he made an offering from the firstlings, that he might signify the firstborn. Therefore, he shows that God's true sacrifice would be us, of whom the prophet says, "Bring to the Lord the offspring of rams." And worthily is he confirmed by the judgment of God.

The sacraments are changed, not the faith. The signs by which something was signified are changed, not the thing signified. For Christ, a ram; for Christ, a lamb; for Christ, a calf; for Christ, a goat, all Christ. A ram, because he leads the flock: he was found in the thickets, when the father Abraham was ordered to spare his son, yet not to depart without offering a sacrifice. And Isaac was Christ, and the ram was Christ. Isaac was carrying wood for himself: Christ was carrying his own cross. For Isaac, a ram; not for Christ, Christ. But in Isaac and in the ram, Christ. The ram was held by the horns in the thicket; ask the Jews, whence they then crowned the Lord. He is a lamb: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sin of the world.

"These things were done in Bethany, beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. The next day John saw Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God; behold Him who taketh away the sin of the world!" Let no one so arrogate to himself as to say that he taketh away the sin of the world. Give heed now to the proud men at whom John pointed the finger. The heretics were not yet born, but already were they pointed out; against them he then cried from the river, against whom he now cries from the Gospel. Jesus comes, and what says he? "Behold the Lamb of God!" If to be innocent is to be a lamb, then John was a lamb, for was not he innocent? But who is innocent? To what extent innocent? All come from that branch and shoot, concerning which David sings, even with groanings, "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." Alone, then, was He, the Lamb who came, not so. For He was not conceived in iniquity, because not conceived of mortality; nor did His mother conceive Him in sin, whom the Virgin conceived, whom the Virgin brought forth; because by faith she conceived, and by faith received Him. Therefore, "Behold the Lamb of God." He is not a branch derived from Adam: flesh only did he derive from Adam, Adam's sin He did not assume. He who took not upon Him sin from our lump, He it is who taketh away our sin. "Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world!"

You know that certain men say sometimes, We take away sin from men, we who are holy; for if he be not holy who baptizeth, how taketh he away the sin of another, when he is a man himself full of sin? In opposition to these disputations, let us not speak our own words, let us read what John says: "Behold the Lamb of God; behold Him who taketh away the sin of the world!" Let there not be presumptuous confidence of men upon men: let not the sparrow flee to the mountains, but let it trust in the Lord; and if it lift its eyes to the mountains, from whence cometh aid to it, let it understand that its aid is from the Lord who made heaven and earth. So great is the excellence of John, that to him it is said, "Art thou the Christ?" He says, No. Art thou Elias? He says, No. Art thou a prophet? He says, No. Wherefore then dost thou baptize? "Behold the Lamb of God; behold Him who taketh away the sin of the world!"

(Tr. iv. c. 10) If the Lamb of God is innocent, and John is the lamb, must he not be innocent? But all men come of that stock of which David sings sorrowing, Behold, I was conceived in wickedness. (Ps. 51:5) He then alone was the Lamb, who was not thus conceived; for He was not conceived in wickedness, nor in sin did His mother bear Him in her womb, Whom a virgin conceived, a virgin brought forth, because that in faith she conceived, and in faith received.

(Tr. iv. c. 10, 11) For He Who took not sin from our nature, He it is Who taketh away our sin. Some say, We take away the sins of men, because we are holy; for if he, who baptizes, is not holy, how can he take away the other's sin, seeing he himself is full of sin? Against these reasoners let us point to the text; Behold Him Who taketh away the sin of the world; in order to do away with such presumption in man towards man.

[Jesus] gave his blood as the price for our salvation, and by undergoing death for a time he condemned the sovereignty of death forever. The Lamb that was innocent was killed. But by a wonderful and longed-for display [of his power] he efficaciously weakened the strength of the lion that had killed him. The Lamb that took away the sins of the world brought to naught the lion that had brought sins into the world. It was the Lamb that restored us by the offering of his flesh and blood, so that we would not perish.

"The next day John saw Jesus coming to him." Blessed John bore testimony above concerning Christ absent; here he bears testimony concerning Christ coming to him. The bearing of testimony is described in this order: first, the occasion for testifying is touched upon; second, the testification; third, the comparison with the preceding testimony.

The occasion for testifying is first touched upon: and this was because Jesus came to John to be baptized by him; therefore he says: "The next day John saw Jesus coming to him," namely to be baptized: Matthew 3: "Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him."

"And he said," namely John. Here the testification itself is touched upon, in which he bears testimony concerning the innocence of his humanity and concerning the power of his Divinity. On account of his innocence he says: "Behold the Lamb of God," that is, innocent and undefiled; Isaiah 16: "Send forth the Lamb, O Lord, the ruler of the earth, from the rock of the desert to the mount of the daughter of Zion." As for the power of the Divinity, he says: "Behold, he who takes away the sins of the world," which belongs to the divine power alone: Isaiah 43: "I am, I am he who blots out your iniquities for my own sake"; and he says "Behold," because he whom others foretold, he points out with his finger; therefore concerning him it is said in Matthew 11: "He is a prophet and more than a prophet."

But there is a doubt here: Since it belongs to the lesser to go to the greater, not conversely, it seems that John ought to have gone to Christ. Likewise, since in Christ there was no stain, and baptism signifies cleansing from filth, therefore it signified something false in him. It must be said that something is done in a due or fitting manner either because of necessity, or because of supererogation. That the lesser should go to the greater, this is a debt of necessity; whence John said to the Lord: "I ought to be baptized by you." But that the greater should go to the lesser, this is a matter of perfection and supererogation. Thus the Lord came to John; whence he himself said to John: "So it becomes us to fulfill all justice," Matthew three. That he came, therefore, was an act of condescension and a commendation of humility.

As to why he willed to be baptized: it must be said that just as by a significative word something is said of the head by reason of the members, so by an enacted act something is signified in the head on behalf of the members. Whence that baptism signified no interior cleansing in Christ, but only in the members. The reason, moreover, why Christ willed to be baptized was threefold: that he might give an example of humility; that he might confer regenerative power upon the waters; that through the baptism of John he might manifest himself to all.

He proclaimed the presence of the Lord, saying: Behold the lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world, calling him a lamb as being a sacrificial victim, and taking away the sin of the world—as delivering the world from sin, rendering men incorrupt, and immortal and immutable through the resurrection. This great John was privileged to be the herald of such a ministry and of such great things.

That Christ is called a sheep and a lamb who was to be slain, and concerning the sacrament (mystery) of the passion. In Isaiah: "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before his shearer is dumb, so He opened not His mouth. In His humiliation His judgment was taken away: who shall relate His nativity? Because His life shall be taken away from the earth. By the transgressions of my people He was led to death; and I will give the wicked for His burial, and the rich themselves for His death; because He did no wickedness, nor deceits with His mouth. Wherefore He shall gain many, and shall divide the spoils of the strong; because His soul was delivered up to death, and He was counted among transgressors. And He bare the sins of many, and was delivered for their offences." Also in Jeremiah: "Lord, give me knowledge, and I shall know it: then I saw their meditations. I was led like a lamb without malice to the slaughter; against me they devised a device, saying, Come, let us cast the tree into His bread, and let us erase His life from the earth, and His name shall no more be a remembrance." Also in Exodus God said to Moses: "Let them take to themselves each man a sheep, through the houses of the tribes, a sheep without blemish, perfect, male, of a year old it shall be to you. Ye shall take it from the lambs and from the goats, and all the congregation of the synagogue of the children of Israel shall kill it in the evening; and they shall take of its blood, and shall place it upon the two posts, and upon the threshold in the houses, in the very houses in which they shall eat it. And they shall eat the flesh on the same night, roasted with fire; and they shall eat unleavened bread with bitter herbs. Ye shall not eat of them raw nor dressed in water, but roasted with fire; the head with the feet and the inward parts. Ye shall leave nothing of them to the morning; and ye shall not break a bone of it. But what of it shall be left to the morning shall be burnt with fire. But thus ye shall eat it; your loins girt, and your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hands; and ye shall eat it in haste: for it is the Lord's passover." Also in the Apocalypse: "And I saw in the midst of the throne, and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, a Lamb standing as if slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent forth throughout all the earth. And He came and took the book from the right. hand of God, who sate on the throne. And when He had taken the book, the four living creatures and the four and twenty elders cast themselves before the Lamb, having every one of them harps and golden cups full of odours of supplications, which are the prayers of the saints; and they sang a new song, saying, Worthy art Thou, O Lord, to take the book, and to open its seals: for Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us with Thy blood from every tribe, anti and people, and nation; and Thou hast made us a kingdom unto our God, and hast made us priests, and they shall reign upon the earth." Also in the Gospel: "On the next day John saw Jesus coming to him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, and behold Him that taketh away the sins of the world!"

And saith, Behold the Lamb of God, Which taketh away the sin of the world.

No longer has prepare ye the way fit place, since He at length is seen and is before the eyes for Whom the preparation is made: the nature of the thing began to need other words. It needed to explain, Who He is Who is come, and to whom He maketh His descent Who hath come to us from Heaven. Behold, therefore, saith he, the Lamb of God Which taketh away the sin of the world, Whom the Prophet Isaiah did signify to us, saying, He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb: Whom of old, too, saith he, the law of Moses typified, but then it saved in part, not extending mercy to all (for it was a type and shadow): but now He Who of old was dimly pictured, the very Lamb, the spotless Sacrifice, is led to the slaughter for all, that He might drive away the sin of the world, that He might overturn the destroyer of the earth, that dying for all He might bring to nought death, that He might undo the curse that is upon us, that He might at length end Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return, that He might become the second Adam, not of the earth, but from heaven, and might be the beginning of all good to the nature of man, deliverance from the imported corruption, Bestower of eternal life, foundation of our reconciliation to God, beginning of godliness and righteousness, way to the Kingdom of Heaven. For one Lamb died for all, saving the whole flock on earth to God the Father, One for all, that He might subject all to God, One for all, that He might gain all: that at length all should not henceforth live to themselves but to Him Which died for them and rose again. For since we were in many sins, and therefore due to death and corruption, the Father hath given the Son a redemption for us, One for all, since all are in Him, and He above all. One died for all, that all should live in Him. For death having swallowed up the Lamb for all, hath vomited forth all in Him and with Him. For all we were in Christ, Who on account of us and for us died and rose again. But sin being destroyed, how could it be that death which was of it and because of it should not altogether come to nothing? The root dying, how could the shoot yet survive? wherefore should we yet die, now that sin hath been destroyed? therefore jubilant in the Sacrifice of the Lamb of God we say: O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? For all iniquity, as the Psalmist sings somewhere, shall stop her mouth, no longer able to accuse those who have sinned from infirmity. For it is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us, that we might escape the curse from transgression.

The next day he seeth Jesus coming to him.

In a very little time, the Baptist is declared to be Prophet alike and Apostle. For Whom he was heralding as coming, Him now come he points out. Therefore, he bounded beyond even the measure of prophets, as the Saviour Himself saith when discoursing with the Jews concerning him, What went ye out into the wilderness for to see? A prophet, yea, I say unto you and more than a prophet. For they in their times prophesied that Christ should be revealed, but he, crying that He shall come, also pointed Him out come. For the next day, saith he, he seeth Jesus coming to him.

No longer does John need to "prepare the way," since the one for whom the preparation was being made is right there before his eyes.… But now he who of old was dimly pictured, the very Lamb, the spotless Sacrifice, is led to the slaughter for all, that he might drive away the sin of the world, that he might overturn the destroyer of the earth, that dying for all he might annihilate death, that he might undo the curse that is upon us.… For one Lamb died for all, saving the whole flock on earth to God the Father, one for all, that he might subject all to God.

The sacrifice was the Christ of God, foretold in ancient times as coming to human beings, to be sacrificed like a sheep for the whole human race. As Isaiah the prophet says of him: "As a sheep he was led to slaughter, and as a lamb before her shearers he did not open his mouth." And he adds, "He bears our sins and is pained for us; yet we accounted him to be in trouble, and in suffering, and our sins, and he was made sick on account of our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed.… And the Lord has given him up for our iniquities.… For he himself did not sin, nor was guile found in his mouth." Jeremiah, another Hebrew prophet, speaks similarly in the person of Christ: "I was led as a lamb to the slaughter."John the Baptist sets the seal on their predictions at the appearance of our Savior. For beholding him, and pointing him out to those present as the one foretold by the prophets, he cried, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world."

Or by the sin of the world is meant original sin, which is common to the whole world: which original sin, as well as the sins of every one individually, Christ by His grace remits.

But then only will sin be entirely taken away from the human race, when our corruption has been turned to a glorious incorruption. We cannot be free from sin, so long as we are held in the death of the body.

In order, then, to show the time when He is to come whom the blessed Daniel desired to see, he says, "And after seven weeks there are other threescore and two weeks," which period embraces the space of 434 years. For after the return of the people from Babylon under the leadership of Jesus the son of Josedech, and Ezra the scribe, and Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel, of the tribe of David, there were 434 years unto the coming of Christ, in order that the Priest of priests might be manifested in the world, and that He who taketh away the sins of the world might be evidently set forth, as John speaks concerning Him: "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!" And in like manner Gabriel says: "To blot out transgressions, and make reconciliation for sins." But who has blotted out our transgressions? Paul the apostle teaches us, saying, "He is our peace who made both one; " and then, "Blotting out the handwriting of sins that was against us."

Now, as our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also God, was prophesied of under the figure of a lion, on account of His royalty and glory, in the same way have the Scriptures also aforetime spoken of Antichrist as a lion, on account of his tyranny and violence. For the deceiver seeks to liken himself in all things to the Son of God. Christ is a lion, so Antichrist is also a lion; Christ is a king, so Antichrist is also a king. The Saviour was manifested as a lamb; so he too, in like manner, will appear as a lamb, though within he is a wolf. The Saviour came into the World in the circumcision, and he will come in the same manner. The Lord sent apostles among all the nations, and he in like manner will send false apostles. The Saviour gathered together the sheep that were scattered abroad, and he in like manner will bring together a people that is scattered abroad. The Lord gave a seal to those who believed on Him, and he will give one like manner. The Saviour appeared in the form of man, and he too will come in the form of a man. The Saviour raised up and showed His holy flesh like a temple, and he will raise a temple of stone in Jerusalem. And his seductive arts we shall exhibit in what follows. But for the present let us turn to the question in hand.

Thus also two forerunners were indicated. The first was John the son of Zacharias, who appeared in all things a forerunner and herald of our Saviour, preaching of the heavenly light that had appeared in the world. He first fulfilled the course of forerunner, and that from his mother's womb, being conceived by Elisabeth, in order that to those, too, who are children from their mother's womb he might declare the new birth that was to take place for their sakes by the Holy Ghost and the Virgin. He, on hearing the salutation addressed to Elisabeth, leaped with joy in his mother's womb, recognising God the Word conceived in the womb of the Virgin. Thereafter he came forward preaching in the wilderness, proclaiming the baptism of repentance to the people, (and thus) announcing prophetically salvation to the nations living in the wilderness of the world. After this, at the Jordan, seeing the Saviour with his own eye, he points Him out, and says, "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!" He also first preached to those in Hades, becoming a forerunner there when he was put to death by Herod, that there too he might intimate that the Saviour would descend to ransom the souls of the saints from the hand of death.

For this is the knowledge of salvation which was wanting to them, that of the Son of God, which John made known, saying, "Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world. This is He of whom I said, After me cometh a man who was made before me; because He was prior to me: and of His fulness have all we received." This, therefore, was the knowledge of salvation; but [it did not consist in] another God, nor another Father, nor Bythus, nor the Pleroma of thirty Aeons, nor the Mother of the (lower) Ogdoad: but the knowledge of salvation was the knowledge of the Son of God, who is both called and actually is, salvation, and Saviour, and salutary. Salvation, indeed, as follows: "I have waited for Thy salvation, O Lord." And then again, Saviour: "Behold my God, my Saviour, I will put my trust in Him." But as bringing salvation, thus: "God hath made known His salvation (salutare) in the sight of the heathen." For He is indeed Saviour, as being the Son and Word of God; but salutary, since [He is] Spirit; for he says: "The Spirit of our countenance, Christ the Lord." But salvation, as being flesh: for "the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." This knowledge of salvation, therefore, John did impart to those repenting, and believing in the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world.

"The next day he seeth Jesus coming to him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

Wherefore then did He come to John? In order that since John had baptized Him with many (others), no one might suppose that He had hastened to John for the same reason as the rest to confess sins, and to wash in the river unto repentance. For this He comes, to give John an opportunity of setting this opinion right again, for by saying, "Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world," he removes the whole suspicion. For very plain it is that One so pure as to be able to wash away the sins of others, does not come to confess sins, but to give opportunity to that marvelous herald to impress what he had said more definitely on those who had heard his former words, and to add others besides. The word "Behold" is used, because many had been seeking Him by reason of what had been said, and for a long time. For this cause, pointing Him out when present, he said, "Behold," this is He so long sought, this is "the Lamb." He calls Him "Lamb," to remind the Jews of the prophecy of Isaiah, and of the shadow under the law of Moses, that he may the better lead them from the type to the reality. That Lamb of Moses took not at once away the sin of any one; but this took away the sin of all the world; for when it was in danger of perishing, He quickly delivered it from the wrath of God.

First of all, the Scripture about the Hebrew Exodus has been read and the words of the mystery have been explained as to how the sheep was sacrificed and the people were saved.

Therefore, understand this, O beloved: The mystery of the passover is new and old, eternal and temporal, corruptible and incorruptible, mortal and immortal...

The sheep was corruptible, but the Lord is incorruptible, who was crushed as a lamb, but who was resurrected as God. For although he was led to sacrifice as a sheep, yet he was not a sheep; and although he was as a lamb without voice, yet indeed he was not a lamb. The one was the model; the other was found to be the finished product.

For God replaced the lamb, and a man the sheep; but in the man was Christ, who contains all things...

For the one who was born as Son, and led to slaughter as a lamb, and sacrificed as a sheep, and buried as a man, rose up from the dead as God, since he is by nature both God and man.

He is everything... in that he is begotten he is Son, in that he suffers he is sheep, in that he is buried he is man, in that he comes to life again he is God.

Such is Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever. Amen.

There are five animals that are offered on the altar, three being land animals and two winged. It seems worthwhile to me to ask why the Savior is said to be a "lamb" by John and none of the rest. But also, in the case of the land animals, since three types of animal are offered according to each species, why did he name the lamb from the species of sheep? Now these are the five animals: a young bull, a sheep, a goat, a turtledove, a pigeon.And the three types of sheep are a ram, the ewe and the lamb.… It is the lamb, however, that we find offered in the perpetual sacrifices. … What other perpetual sacrifice can be spiritual to a spiritual being than the Word in his prime, the Word symbolically called "lamb"?… But if we examine the declaration about Jesus, who is pointed out by John in the words "Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world," from the standpoint of the plan of salvation when the Son of God bodily lived among the human race, we will assume that the lamb is none other than his humanity. For he "was led as a sheep to the slaughter and was dumb as a lamb before its shearer," saying, "I was an innocent lamb being led to be sacrificed." This is why in the Apocalypse, too, a little lamb is seen "standing as though slain." This lamb, indeed, which was slain according to certain secret reasons, has become the expiation of the whole world. According to the Father's love for humanity, he also submitted to slaughter on behalf of the world, purchasing us with his own blood from him who bought us when we had sold ourselves into sin. He, however, who led this lamb to the sacrifice was God in man, the great high priest, who reveals this through the saying, "No one takes my life from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again."

(tom. vi. c. 30) After this testimony, Jesus is seen coming to John, not only persevering in his confession, but also advanced in goodness: as is intimated by the second day. Wherefore it is said, The next day John seeth Jesus coming to him. Long before this, the Mother of Jesus, as soon as she had conceived Him, went to see the mother of John then pregnant; and as soon as the sound of Mary's salutation reached the ears of Elisabeth, John leaped in the womb: but now the Baptist himself after his testimony seeth Jesus coming. Men are first prepared by hearing from others, and then see with their own eyes. The example of Mary going to see Elisabeth her inferior, and the Son of God going to see the Baptist, should teach us modesty and fervent charity to our inferiors. What place the Saviour came from when He came to the Baptist we are not told here; but we find it in Matthew, Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John to be baptized of him. (Matt. 3:13)

(tom. vi. c. 32. et seq.) But whereas five kinds of animals are offered in the temple, three beasts of the field, a calf, a sheep, and a goat; and two fowls of the air, a turtle dove and a pigeon; and of the sheep kind three are introduced, the ram, the ewe, the lamb; of these three he mentions only the lamb; the lamb, as we know, being offered in the daily sacrifice, one in the morning, and one in the evening. But what other daily offering can there be, that can be meant to be offered by a reasonable nature, except the perfect Word, typically called the Lamb? This sacrifice, which is offered up as soon as the soul begins to be enlightened, shall be accounted as a morning sacrifice, referring to the frequent exercise of the mind in divine things; for the soul cannot continually apply to the highest objects because of its union with an earthly and gross body. By this Word too, Which is Christ the Lamb, we shall be able to reason on many things, and shall in a manner attain to Him in the evening, while engaged with things of the bodyt. But He Who offered the lamb for a sacrifice, was God hid in human form, the great Priest, He who saith below, No man taketh it (My life) from Me, but I lay it down of Myself: (John 10:18) whence this name, the Lamb of God: for He carrying our sorrows, (Isaiah 53:4. 1 Pet. 2:24.) and taking away the sins of the whole world, hath undergone death, as it were baptism. (Luke 12:50.) For God suffers no fault to pass uncorrected; but punishes it by the sharpest discipline.

(tom. vi. c. 36) As there was a connection between the other sacrifices of the law, and the daily sacrifice of the lamb, in the same way the sacrifice of this Lamb has its reflexion in the pouring out of the blood of the Martyrs, by whose patience, confession, and zeal for goodness, the machinations of the ungodly are frustrated.

And as He was called symbolically by the word of the prophecy, "lamb", and "sheep", and John also called Him, "The Lamb of God", even so did He call the disciples of His word by the names which indicate simpleness. And He did this that when all believers heard what names were given to them by the Shepherd they might, like sheep, and lambs, and ewes, be incited to abide in all simpleness, and might not go forth from the law of simplicity.

Now the the garment of mourning is rent; we have put on the white robe Which the spirit has woven for us from the lamb's fleece of our Lamb and our God; Sin is taken away, and immortality is given us, our restoration is clear. The Forerunner has proclaimed it.… O, the message of the Baptist, and the mystery in it! He calls the shepherd lamb, and not only a lamb, but one to free from mistakes. He showed the lawless that the goat which they sent into the desert was ineffective. "Lo," he said, "the lamb; there is no longer need of the goat; Put your hands on him, All of you who confess your sins, For He has come to take them away, those of the people, and of the whole world. For lo, the One whom the Father has sent to us is the One who carries away evil, Who appeared and illumined all things."

"He was," He says, "the burning and shining lamp; " as being he who not merely "prepared His ways in the desert," but withal, by pointing out "the Lamb of God," illumined the minds of men by his heralding, so that they understood Him to be that Lamb whom Moses was wont to announce as destined to suffer.

Then, again, when He is designated by John (the Baptist) as "the Lamb of God," He is not described as Himself the same with Him of whom He is the beloved Son.

In fact, they say that Jesus Christ descended, that is, that the dove came down on Jesus; and, since the dove is styled by the Greek name peristera/-(peristera), it has in itself this number DCCCI.

As appears from the narrative of the Evangelist, John the Baptist said his previous words as if the Lord had come already and walked among crowds who still ignored him. Now, since he is coming to be baptized, he is described with the words "this is the Lamb of God." Let us consider how Scripture likes to place words in the appropriate context of facts. By saying in this passage, "This is the one who takes away the sin of the world," he did not say "the only begotten Son," or the "Son of God" or "the one who is close to the father's bosom," which appear in what he said above. Although now it would have seemed right to express the greatness of his nature, in order to confirm the promise of the things he was going to give. But this is not what he said. Instead, he called him "lamb," and with this name he signifies his passion. In fact, he was called lamb and sheep to signify his death when he washed away sin. Since the sin reigned in our mortality, and death was gaining strength in us because of sin, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior came and remitted all these things to us. And after destroying death through his death, he also destroyed the sin rooted in our nature because of mortality. Through his promise he made us immortal, and he will render us so in reality when he defeats sin with the gift of immortality.

The Lord often comes to the Forerunner. Why is this? Since the Lord was also baptized by John, as one of many, He often comes to him, no doubt, so that some would not think that He was baptized on equal terms with the rest as one guilty of sins. The Baptist, wishing to correct such an assumption, says: "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes upon Himself the sin of the world." He who is so pure that He takes upon Himself and destroys the sins of others clearly could not have received the baptism of confession (repentance) on equal terms with the rest. Examine, I ask you, this expression as well: "behold the Lamb of God." This word is addressed to those who desire to see the Lamb of whom Isaiah proclaims (Isa. 53:7–8). "Behold," he says, "that Lamb whom they seek; that Lamb is right here." For naturally, many who had diligently studied the prophetic book of Isaiah were occupied with the question of who that Lamb might be. So John points Him out. He did not say simply "a lamb," but "that Lamb," for there are many lambs, just as there are many christs; but He is that Lamb whose type was set forth by Moses (Exod. 12) and of whom Isaiah proclaims (Isa. 53:7–8). Christ is called the "Lamb of God" either because God gave Him over to death for us, or because God accepted Christ's death for our salvation. Just as we commonly say "this is the sacrifice of so-and-so," instead of saying "so-and-so offered this sacrifice," so too the Lord is called the Lamb of God because God the Father out of love for us gave Him over to be slain for us. John did not say "took away" sin, but "takes away," because He takes upon Himself our sins every day, some through baptism, others through repentance. The lambs that were slain in the Old Testament did not perfectly destroy a single sin; but this Lamb takes away the sin of the whole world, that is, destroys and blots it out. Why did John not say "sins," but "sin"? Perhaps because, by saying "sin," he spoke of all sins in general; just as we usually say "man" fell away from God, instead of "all mankind," so he here, by saying "sin," indicated all sins. Or perhaps because the sin of the world consisted in disobedience, since man plunged into passions through disobedience to God, and the Lord blotted out this disobedience by being obedient unto death and healing the opposite with the opposite.

(in loc.) He is called the Lamb of God, because God the Father accepted His death for our salvation, or, in other words, because He delivered Him up to death for our sakes. For just as we say, This is the offering of such a man, meaning the offering made by him; in the same sense Christ is called the Lamb of God Who gave His Son to die for our salvation. And whereas that typical lamb did not take away any man's sin, this one hath taken away the sin of the whole world, rescuing it from the danger it was in from the wrath of God. Behold Him1 Who taketh away the sin of the world: he saith not, who will take, but, Who taketh away the sin of the world; as if He were always doing this. For He did not then only take it away when He suffered, but from that time to the present, He taketh it away; not by being always crucified, for He made one sacrifice for sins, but by ever washing it by means of that sacrifice.

(in loc.) Why does he say the sin of the world, not sins? Because he wished to express sin universally: just as we say commonly, that man was cast out of paradise; meaning the whole human race.

253 Above, John had given testimony to Christ when he was questioned. Here, he gives testimony to him on his own initiative. First, he gives the testimony; secondly, he confirms it (v 32). As to the first: first, the circumstances of the testimony are given; and secondly, the testimony itself is given (v 29); thirdly, suspicion is removed from the witness (v 31).

254 The circumstances are first described as to the time. Hence he says, The next day. This gives credit to John for his steadfastness, because he bore witness to Christ not for just one day or once, but on many days and frequently: "Every day I will bless you" (Ps 144:2). His progress, too, is cited, because one day should not be just like the day before, but the succeeding day should be different, i.e., better: "They will go from strength to strength" (Ps 83:8).

Another circumstance mentioned is his manner of testifying, because John saw Jesus. This shows his certitude, for testimony based on sight is most certain. The last circumstance he mentions is about the one to whom he bore witness. Hence he says that he saw Jesus coming toward him, i.e., from Galilee, as it says, "Jesus came from Galilee" (Mt 3:13). We should not understand this as referring to the time when he came to be baptized, of which Matthew is here speaking, but of another time, i.e., a time when he came to John after he had already been baptized and was staying near the Jordan. Otherwise, he would not have said, "'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and rest is the one who is to baptize with the Holy Spirit.' Now I have seen" (v 33). Therefore, he had already seen him and the Spirit come down as a dove upon him.

255 One reason why Christ now came to John was to confirm the testimony of John. For John had spoken of Christ as "the one who is to come after me" (v 27). But since Christ was now present, some might not understand who it was that was to come. So Christ came to John to be pointed out by him, with John saying, Look! There is the Lamb of God. Another reason Christ came was to correct an error. For some might believe that the first time Christ came, i.e., to be baptized, he came to John to be cleansed from his sins. So, in order to preclude this, Christ came to him even after his baptism. Accordingly, John clearly says, There is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. He committed no sin, but came to take away sin. He also came to give us an example of humility, because as it is said, "The greater you are the more humble you should be in all matters" (Sir 3:20).

Note that after the conception of Christ, when his mother, the Virgin, went in haste to the mountainous country to visit John's mother, Elizabeth, that John, still in his mother's womb and unable to speak, leaped in her womb as though performing a religious dance out of reverence for Christ. And as then, so even now; for when Christ comes to John out of humility, John offers his testimony and reverence and breaks out saying, Look! There is the Lamb of God.

256 With these words John gives his testimony showing the power of Christ. Then Christ's dignity is shown (v 30). He shows the power of Christ in two ways: first, by means of a symbol; secondly, by explaining it (v 29).

257 As to the first, we should note, as Origen says, that it was customary in the Old Law for five animals to be offered in the temple: three land animals, namely, the heifer, goat and sheep (although the sheep might be a ram, a sheep or a lamb) and two birds, namely, the turtle-dove and the dove. All of these prefigured the true sacrifice, which is Christ, who "gave himself for us as an offering to God," as is said in Ephesians (5:2).

Why then did the Baptist, when giving witness to Christ, specifically call him a Lamb? The reason for this is that, as stated in Numbers (28:3), although there were other sacrifices in the temple at other times, yet each day there was a time in which a lamb was offered every morning, and another was offered in the evening. This never varied, but was regarded as the principal offering, and the other offerings were in the form of additions. And so the lamb, which was the principal sacrifice, signified Christ, who is the principal sacrifice. For although all the saints who suffered for the faith of Christ contribute something to the salvation of the faithful, they do this only inasmuch as they are immolated upon the oblation of the Lamb, they being, as it were, in oblation added to the principal sacrifice. The lamb is offered in the morning and in the evening because it is through Christ that the way is opened to the contemplation and enjoyment of the intelligible things of God, and this pertains to "morning knowledge"; and we are instructed how to use earthly things without staining ourselves, and this pertains to "evening knowledge." And so he says, Look! There is the Lamb of God, i.e., the one signified by the lamb.

He says, of God, because there are two natures in Christ, a human nature and a divine nature. And it is due to the power of the divinity that this sacrifice has the power to cleanse and sanctify us from our sins, inasmuch as "God was, in Christ, reconciling the world to himself" (2 Cor 5:19). Or, he is called the Lamb of God, because offered by God, i.e., by Christ himself, who is God; just as we call what a man offers the offering of the man. Or, he is called the Lamb of God, that is, of the Father, because the Father provided man with an oblation to offer that satisfied for sins, which man could not have through himself. So when Isaac asked Abraham, "Where is the victim for the holocaust?" he answered, "God himself will provide a victim for the holocaust" (Gn 22:7); "God did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for all of us" (Rom 8:32).

258 Christ is called a Lamb, first, because of his purity: "Your lamb will be without blemish" (Ex 12:5); "You were not redeemed by perishable gold or silver" (1 Pt 1:18). Secondly, because of his gentleness: "Like a lamb before the shearer, he will not open his mouth" (Is 53:7). Thirdly, because of his fruit; both with respect to what we put on: "Lambs will be your clothing" (Prv 27:26), "Put on the Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom 13:14); and with respect to food: "My flesh is for the life of the world" (below 6:52). And so Isaiah said (16:1): "Send forth, O Lord, the lamb, the ruler of the earth."

259 Then when he says, who takes away the sins of the world, he explains the symbol he used. In the law, sin could not be taken away either by a lamb or by any other sacrifice, because as is said in Hebrews (10:4), "It is impossible that sins be taken away by the blood of bulls and goats." This blood takes away, i.e., removes, the sins of the world. "Take away all iniquity" (Hos 14:3). Or, takes away, i.e., he takes upon himself the sins of the whole world, as is said, "He bore our sins in his own body" (1 Pt 2:24); "It was our infirmities that he bore, our sufferings that he endured," as we read in Isaiah (53:4).

However, according to a Gloss, he says sin, and not "sins," in order to show in a universal way that he has taken away every kind of sin: "He is the offering for our sins" (1 Jn 2:2); or because he died for one sin, that is, original sin: "Sin entered into this world through one man" (Rom 5:12).

"This is He of whom I spake, After me cometh a Man who was made before me; for He was before me." "Cometh after me," because He was born later; "was made before me," because preferred before me; "He was before me," because, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

(Tr. iv) He cometh after me, because he was born after me: He is made before me, because He is preferred to me.

"This is he of whom I said" to you. Here the comparison to the preceding testimony is touched upon. Whence he repeats the testimony which he had given in his absence; therefore he says: "This is he of whom I said," namely in the preceding testimony: "after me comes a man," namely by temporal birth, because he was born six months after him. Concerning this man, Jeremiah thirty-one: "The Lord will create a new thing upon the earth: a woman shall encompass a man." "Who was made before me," namely in dignity, "because he was before me," in Divinity: above in the same: "In the beginning was the Word."

This is He of Whom I said.

He leads the hearers to remembrance of his words, and yields to Christ the superiority in glory, accomplishing the work, not of love, but rather of truth and necessity. For the creature is subject, even if it willeth not, to the Creator, the bond to the Lord, the supplied to the Giver. But in what manner Christ was after John, but preferred before him, for He was before him, as himself confesseth, we have spoken sufficiently in what has preceded.

Eliezar sought Rebekah as a bride at a well of water. Jacob sought Rachel at a well of water, as Moses did so with Zipporah. Thus, all of these were types of the Lord, who sought his church as a bride by the baptism at the Jordan River. And just as Eliezar made Rebekah known to his master when he came to meet her in the field, so also John made our Savior known at the Jordan: "See, the Lamb of God, for he takes away the sin of the world."

He explains the reason of this superiority, in what follows: For He was before me; as if his meaning was; And this is the reason of His being superior to me, though born after me, viz. that He is not circumscribed by the time of His nativity. He Who was born of His mother in time, was begotten of His Father out of time.

"This is He of whom I said, He that cometh after me is preferred before me."

Seest thou here also how he interprets the word "before"? for having called Him "Lamb," and that He "taketh away the sin of the world," then he saith that "He is preferred before me, for He was before me"; declaring that this is the "before," the taking upon Him the sins of the world, "and the baptizing with the Holy Ghost." "For my coming had no farther object than to proclaim the common Benefactor of the world, and to afford the baptism of water; but His was to cleanse all men, and to give them the power of the Comforter." "He is preferred before me," that is to say, has appeared brighter than I, because "He was before me." Let those who have admitted the madness of Paul of Samosata be ashamed when they withstand so manifest a truth.

Above, John says to those who came from the Pharisees: "There stands among you One whom you do not know, but Who takes precedence before me" (Jn. 1:26–27), and now he also points Him out with his finger and declares to those who do not know, saying: "This is the One about whom I testified before the Pharisees, that He takes precedence before me, that is, He surpasses me in dignity and honor." Why? Because He was before me. Listen, Arius. John did not say of Christ "created before me," but "was." Listen also, you sect of the Samosatene. The Lord did not begin His existence from Mary, but was before the Forerunner by His pre-eternal existence. For if the Lord, as you idly babble, received the beginning of His existence from Mary, how could He have been before the Forerunner? And the Forerunner, as everyone knows, came into the world six months before the Lord's birth in the flesh. He is called "a Man" perhaps because He had reached full maturity, for He was baptized at thirty years of age, or perhaps in the sense that He is the Husband of every soul and the Bridegroom of the Church. For the apostle Paul says: "I betrothed you, to present you to one Husband, namely Christ" (2 Cor. 11:2). So too the Forerunner says: "I am only the friend of the Bridegroom and mediator, but the Husband comes after me; I draw souls to faith in Christ, and He is the Husband who will be united with them."

(in loc.) John having said above to those who came from the Pharisees, that there stood one among them whom they knew not, he here points Him out to the persons thus ignorant: This is He of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me. Our Lord is called a man, in reference to His mature age, being thirty years old when He was baptized: or in a spiritual sense, as the Spouse of the Church; in which sense St. Paul speaks, I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. (2 Cor. 11:2)

(in loc.) Attend, O Arius. He saith not, He was created before me, but He was before me. Let the false sect of Paul of Samosata attend. They will see that He did not derive His original existence from Mary; for if He derived the beginning of His being from the Virgin, how could He have been before His precursor? it being evident that the precursor preceded Christ by six months, according to the human birth.

260 Above, the Baptist bore witness to the power of Christ; now he bears witness to his dignity, comparing Christ to himself in three respects. First, with respect to their office and order of preaching. So he says, It is he, pointing him out, that is, the Lamb, of whom I said, i.e., in his absence, After me is to come a man, to preach and baptize, who in birth came after me.

Christ is called a man by reason of his perfect age, because when he began to teach, after his baptism, he had already reached a perfect age: "Jesus was now about thirty years of age" (Lk 3:23). He is also called a man because of the perfection of all the virtues that were in him: "Seven women," i.e., the virtues, "will take hold of one man," the perfect Christ (Is 4:1); "Look, a man! His name is the Orient," because he is the origin of all the virtues found in others (Zec 6:12). He is also called a man because of his espousal, since he is the spouse of the Church: "You will call me 'my husband'" (Hos 2:16); "I espoused you to one husband" (2 Cor 11:2).

261 Secondly, he compares himself to Christ with respect to dignity when he says, who ranks ahead of me. As if to say: Although he comes to preach after me, yet he ranks before me in dignity. "See, he comes, leaping upon the mountains, skipping over the hills" (Sg 2:8). One such hill was John the Baptist, who was passed over by Christ, because as is said below (3:30), "He must increase, and I must decrease."

262 Thirdly, he compares himself to Christ with respect to duration, saying, because he existed before me. As if to say: It is not strange if he ranks ahead of me in dignity; because although he is after me in time, he is before me in eternity, because he existed before me.

This statement refutes a twofold error. First, that of Arius, for John does not say that "he was made before me," as though he were a creature, but he existed before me, from eternity, before every creature: "The Lord brought me forth before all the hills," as is said in Proverbs (8:25). The second error refuted is that of Paul of Samosata: for John said, he existed before me, in order to show that he did not take his beginning from Mary. For if he had taken the beginning of his existence from the Virgin, he would not have existed before the precursor, who, in the order of human generation, preceded Christ by six months.

"And I knew Him not," he said; "but that He might be made manifest to Israel, therefore came I baptizing with water." Give heed for a little, beloved. When did John learn Christ? For he was sent to baptize with water. They asked, Wherefore? That He might be made manifest to Israel, he said. Of what profit was the baptism of John? My brethren, if it had profited in any respect, it would have remained now, and men would have been baptized with the baptism of John, and thus have come to the baptism of Christ. But what saith he? "That He might be made manifest to Israel,"--that is, to Israel itself, to the people Israel, so that Christ might be made manifest to it,--therefore he came baptizing with water. John received the ministry of baptism, that by the water of repentance he might prepare the way for the Lord, not being himself the Lord; but where the Lord was known, it was superfluous to prepare for Him the way, for to those who knew Him He became Himself the way; therefore the baptism of John did not last long. But how was the Lord pointed out? Lowly, that John might so receive a baptism in which the Lord Himself should be baptized.

And was it needful for the Lord to be baptized? I instantly reply to any one who asks this question: Was it needful for the Lord to be born? Was it needful for the Lord to be crucified? Was it needful for the Lord to die? Was it needful for the Lord to be buried? If He undertook for us so great humiliation, might He not also receive baptism? And what profit was there that he received the baptism of a servant? That thou mightest not disdain to receive the baptism of the Lord. Give heed, beloved brethren. Certain catechumens were to arise in the Church of higher grace. It sometimes comes to pass that you see a catechumen who practises continence, bids farewell to the world, renounces all his possessions, distributing them to the poor; and although but a catechumen, instructed in the saving doctrine better, perhaps, than many of the faithful. It is to be feared regarding such an one that he may say to himself about holy baptism, whereby sins are remitted, What more shall I receive? Behold, I am better than this faithful man, and this,--having in his mind those among the faithful who are either married, or who are perhaps ignorant, or who keep possession of their property, while he has given his to the poor,--and considering himself better than those who have been already baptized, he deigns not to come to baptism, saying, Am I to receive what this man has, and this thinking of persons whom he despises, and, as it were, considers it an indignity to receive that which inferiors have received, because he appears to himself to be already better than they; and, nevertheless, all his sins are upon him, and without coming to saving baptism, wherein all sins are remitted, he cannot, with all his excellence, enter into the kingdom of heaven. But the Lord, in order to invite such excellence to his baptism, that sins might be remitted, Himself came to the baptism of His servant; and although He had no sin to be remitted, nor was there anything in Him that needed to be washed, He received baptism from a servant; and by so doing, addressed Himself to the son carrying himself proudly, and exalting himself, and disdaining, perhaps, to receive along with the ignorant that from which salvation comes to him, and said to him: How dost thou extend thyself? How dost thou exalt thyself? How great is thy excellence? How great is thy grace? Can it be greater than mine? If I come to the servant, dost thou disdain to come to the Lord? If I have received the baptism of the servant, dost thou disdain to be baptized by the Lord?

(Tr. iv. c. 12, 13) Now when our Lord became known, it was unnecessary to prepare a way for Him; for to those who knew Him, He became His own way. And therefore John's baptism did not last long, but only so long as to show our Lord's humility. (Tr. v. c. 5.). Our Lord received baptism from a servant, in order to give us such a lesson of humility as might prepare us for receiving the grace of baptism. And that the servant's baptism might not be set before the Lord's, others were baptized with it; who after receiving it, had to receive our Lord's baptism: whereas those who first received our Lord's baptism, did not receive the servant's after.

"And I knew him not." The testification having been set forth, here is placed its corroboration or certitude, which is described in this order. First is touched upon the mode of arriving at certitude; second, the certifying sign; third, the certain testimony.

First, therefore, is touched upon the mode of arriving at certitude, which was through the act of baptizing; therefore he says: "I knew him not," that is, I was not certain concerning him; "but that he might be made manifest in Israel, for this reason I came baptizing in water." He said this very thing in Mark one: "I have baptized you with water, but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit."

It is also asked concerning what he says: "I did not know him." To the contrary: John bore witness concerning Christ before he baptized Him; therefore either he knew Him beforehand, or he bore witness concerning what he did not know. The response according to Chrysostom is that he knew Him in general: for he well knew that Christ had come, and that he himself was His precursor; but nevertheless he did not recognize Him personally and individually, because he had been in the desert from infancy and had not seen Him. But this response cannot stand, because John recognized the Lord in the womb of his mother; how did he not recognize Him when he had already grown so much? Likewise, in Matthew chapter three it is said: "I ought to be baptized by you." The response is that he knew that He was the Christ, but he did not know that He had reserved to Himself the power of baptizing.

It must be said that if one speaks of Christ with respect to His substance, that he did not know Him is to be understood as: he did not know Him so certainly as he knew Him after the sign. If with respect to the power of baptizing, it is to be understood that the power of baptizing is fivefold, namely of authority, cooperation, invocation, excellence, and ministry. The first He gave to no one, nor could He give it; the last He gave; the three intermediate ones He did not give; but the power of excellence and of invocation He could have given, but He was unwilling, lest the unity of the Church be broken.

And I knew Him not, but that He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

He that leaped in the depth of the womb of his mother at the voice of the Holy Virgin while yet bearing the Lord, prophet before the travail-pang, disciple in the womb, says of the Saviour, I knew Him not, and says truly, for he does not lie. For God knows all things of Himself and untaught, but the creature, by being taught. For the Spirit indwelling in the Saints, fulfils what is lacking, and gives to human nature His Own good, I mean, knowledge of things to come, and of the hidden mysteries. Therefore the holy Baptist saying that he does not know the Lord, will by no means speak untruly, in regard of the property of human nature, and the measure befitting the creature, but will attribute the knowledge of all things to God Alone, Who through the Holy Ghost enlighteneth man to the apprehension of hidden things. And very profitably doth he say that of himself he knew not Christ, but is come for that very purpose, to make Him manifest to Israel, that he may not seem to run of his own accord to bear testimony, nor be thought by any the minister of his own will, but the worker of the Divine dispensation, the minister of the Counsel from above revealing to him the Lamb Which taketh away the sin of the world.

In order therefore that the Jews may the more easily come to believe on our Saviour Christ, and may have the most worthy conception of Him, he says that having not known Him, he knows Him, that they may understand then at length God Who revealed Him, and awestruck at the judgment from above, may receive his word concerning Him, and, seeing the servant so great, may proportionally estimate the Dignity of the Master. For his saying, that he was come to make Him manifest to Israel, how does it not denote the care belonging to a servant?

"And I knew Him not," he saith.

Here he renders his testimony free from suspicion, by showing that it was not from human friendship, but had been caused by divine revelation. "I knew Him not," he saith. How then couldest thou be a trustworthy witness? How shalt thou teach others, while thou thyself art ignorant? He did not say "I know Him not," but, "I knew Him not"; so that in this way he would be shown most trustworthy; for why should he have shown favor to one of whom he was ignorant?

"But that He should be made manifest unto Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water."

He then did not need baptism, nor had that layer any other object than to prepare for all others a way to faith on Christ. For be did not say, "that I might cleanse those who are baptized," or, "that I might deliver them from their sins," but, "that He should be made manifest unto Israel." "And why, tell me, could he not without baptism have preached and brought the multitudes to Him?" But in this way it would not have been by any means easy. For they would not so all have run together, if the preaching had been without the baptism; they would not by the comparison have learned His superiority. For the multitude came together not to hear his words, but for what? To be "baptized, confessing their sins." But when they came, they were taught the matters concerning Christ, and the difference of His baptism. Yet even this of John was of greater dignity than the Jewish, and therefore all ran to it; yet even so it was imperfect.

Since the Forerunner was a relative of the Lord (for the angel says to the Virgin: "Behold, Elizabeth your 'kinswoman' has conceived" (Luke 1:36)), lest anyone think that the Forerunner was favoring the Lord and giving such lofty testimony about Him because of his kinship with Him, he often says: "I did not know Him," and thereby removes the suspicion. "But for this reason I came baptizing in water, that He might be made manifest to Israel," that is, so that all might come to faith in Him and He might be made manifest to the people, for this reason I baptize; for when I baptize, the people flock together, and when the people gather, then I also proclaim to them about Christ in my preaching, and He Himself, being in plain sight, is present before them. For if people had not come for baptism, how would John have made the Lord manifest to them? He would not have gone from house to house, leading Christ by the hand and pointing Him out to everyone. Therefore he also says: "I came for this reason to baptize in water, that He might be made manifest by me to the people who come for baptism." From this we also learn that the miracles attributed to Christ in His childhood are false and were composed by those who wished to mock the mystery. For if they were true, how could they not have known the Lord who performed them? At the very least, it is unnatural that such a Wonderworker would not have been spoken of everywhere. But this is not so, no. For before His baptism, the Lord neither performed miracles nor enjoyed renown.

263 Next (v 31), he precludes an erroneous conjecture from his testimony. For someone might say that John bore witness to Christ because of his affection for him, coming from a special friendship. And so, excluding this, John says, And I did not know him!; for John had lived in the desert from boyhood. And although many miracles happened during the birth of Christ, such as the Magi and the star and so on, they were not known to John: both because he was an infant at the time, and because, after withdrawing to the desert, he had no association with Christ. In the interim between his birth and baptism, Christ did not perform any miracles, but led a life similar to any other person, and his power remained unknown to all.

264 It is clear that he worked no miracles in the interim until he was thirty years old from what is said below (2:11): "This beginning of signs Jesus worked in Cana of Galilee." This shows the error of the book, The Infancy of the Savior. The reason he performed no miracles during this period was that if his life had not been like that of other infants, the mystery of the circumcision and incarnation might have been regarded as pure fancy. Accordingly, he postponed showing his knowledge and power to another time, corresponding to the age when other men reach the fulness of their knowledge and power. About this we read, "And Jesus increased in grace and wisdom" (Lk 2:52); not that he acquired a power and wisdom that he previously lacked, for in this respect he was perfect from the instant of his conception, but because his power and wisdom were becoming known to men: "Indeed, you are a hidden God" (Is 45:15).

265 The reason why John did not know him was that he had so far seen no signs, and no one else had known Christ through signs. Hence he adds: It was to reveal him to Israel that I came baptizing with water. As if to say: My entire ministry is to reveal: "He was not the light, but he came in order to bear witness to the light," as was said above (1:8).

266 He says, I came baptizing with water, to distinguish his baptism from that of Christ. For Christ baptized not just in water, but in the Spirit, conferring grace; and so the baptism of John was merely a sign, and not causative.

John's baptism made Christ known in three ways. First, by the preaching of John. For although John could have prepared the way for the Lord and led the people to Christ without baptizing, yet because of the novelty of the service many more came to him than would have come if his preaching were done without baptism. Secondly, John's baptism was useful because of Christ's humility, which he showed by willing to be baptized by John: "Christ came to John, to be baptized by him" (Mt 3:13). This example of humility he gives us here is that no one, however great, should disdain to receive the sacraments from any person ordained for this purpose. Thirdly, because it was during Christ's baptism by John that the power of the Father was present in the voice, and the Holy Spirit was present in the dove, by which the power and dignity of Christ were all the more shown: "And the voice of the Father was heard: 'This is my beloved Son'" (Lk 3:22).

Christ was certainly not then anointed with the Holy Spirit when the Spirit as a dove descended upon him at his baptism. For here he condescends to prefigure his body, that is, his church, in which preeminently the baptized receive the Holy Spirit.… For it would be most absurd to believe that he received the Holy Spirit when he was near thirty years of age. For that was the age at which he was baptized by John. But although he came to baptism without any sin at all, he did not come without the Holy Spirit. For it was written of his servant and forerunner John himself, "He shall be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb." If [John], though generated by his father, still received the Holy Spirit when formed in the womb, what must be understood and believed of the man Christ whose flesh had not a carnal but spiritual conception?

We do not attribute only to Christ the possession of a real body and say that the Holy Spirit assumed a false appearance to people's eyes. For the Holy Spirit could no more, in consistency with his nature, deceive people than could the Son of God. The almighty God, who made every creature out of nothing, could as easily form a real body of a dove, without the instrumentality of other doves, as he made a real body in the womb of the Virgin without the seed of the male.

Now if the dove's note is a moaning, as we all know it to be, and doves moan in love, hear what the apostle says, and wonder not that the Holy Ghost willed to be manifested in the form of a dove: "For what we should pray for as we ought," says he, "we know not; but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." What then, my brethren? shall we say this, that the Spirit groans where He has perfect and eternal blessedness with the Father and the Son? For the Holy Spirit is God, even as the Son of God is God, and the Father God. I have said "God" thrice, but not three Gods; for indeed it is God thrice rather than three Gods; because the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one God: this you know full well. It is not then in Himself with Himself in that Trinity, in that blessedness, in that His eternal substance, that the Holy Spirit groans; but in us He groans because He makes us to groan. Nor is it a little matter that the Holy Spirit teaches us to groan, for He gives us to know that we are sojourners in a foreign land, and He teaches us to sigh after our native country; and through that very longing do we groan. He with whom it is well in this world, or rather he who thinks it is well with him, who exults in the joy of carnal things, in the abundance of things temporal, in an empty felicity, has the cry of the raven; for the raven's cry is full of clamor, not of groaning. But he who knows that he is in the pressure of this mortal life, a pilgrim "absent from the Lord," that he does not yet possess that perpetual blessedness which is promised to us, but that he has it in hope, and will have it in reality when the Lord shall come openly in glory who came before in humility concealed; he, I say, who knows this doth groan. And so long as it is for this he groans, he does well to groan; it was the Spirit that taught him to groan, he learnt it from the dove.

When He sent the Holy Spirit He manifested Him visibly in two ways-by a dove and by fire: by a dove upon the Lord when He was baptized, by fire upon the disciples when they were gathered together. For when the Lord had ascended into heaven after His resurrection, having spent forty days with His disciples, and the day of Pentecost being fully come, He sent unto them the Holy Spirit as He had promised. Accordingly the Spirit coming at that time filled the place, and there was first a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, and "there appeared unto them," it says, "cloven tongues as of fire, and it sat upon each of them; and they began to speak with tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." Here we have seen a dove descending upon the Lord; there, cloven tongues upon the assembled disciples: in the former, simplicity is shown; in the latter, fervency. Now there are who are said to be simple, who are only indolent; they are called simple, but they are only slow. Not such was Stephen, full of the Holy Ghost: he was simple, because he injured no one; he was fervent, because he reproved the ungodly. For he held not his peace before the Jews. His are those burning words: "Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised of heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Spirit." Mighty impetuosity; but it is the dove without gall raging. For that you know that he was fierce without gall, see how, upon hearing these words, they who were the ravens immediately took up stones and rushed together upon this dove. They begin to stone Stephen; and he who a little before stormed and glowed with ardor of spirit,-who had, as it were, made an onset on his enemies, and like one full of violence had attacked them in such fiery and burning words as you have heard, "Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears," that any one who heard those words might fancy that Stephen, if he were allowed, would have them consumed at once,-but when the stones thrown from their hands reached him, with fixed knee he saith, "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge." He held fast to the unity of the dove. For his Master, upon whom the dove descended, had done the same thing before him; who, while hanging on the cross, said, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Wherefore by the dove it is shown that they who are sanctified by the Spirit should be without guile; and that their simplicity should not continue cold is shown us by the fire. Nor let it trouble you that the tongues were divided; for tongues are diverse, therefore the appearance was that of cloven tongues. "Cloven tongues," it saith, "as of fire, and it sat upon each of them." There is a diversity of tongues, but the diversity of tongues does not imply schisms. Be not afraid of separation in the cloven tongues; in the dove recognize unity.

Hence in this manner it behoved the Holy Spirit to be manifested when coming upon the Lord, that every one might understand that if he has the Holy Spirit he ought to be simple as the dove, to have true peace with his brethren, that peace which the kisses of doves signify. Ravens have their kisses too; but in the case of the ravens it is a false peace, in that of the dove a true peace. Not every one, therefore, who says, "Peace be with you," is to be listened to as if he were a dove. How then are the kisses of ravens distinguished from those of doves? Ravens kiss, but they tear; the nature of doves is innocent of tearing. Where consequently there is tearing, there is not true peace in the kisses. They have true peace who have not torn the Church. Ravens feed upon carrion, it is not so with the dove; it lives on the fruits of the earth, its food is innocent. This, brethren, is really worthy of admiration in the dove. Sparrows are very small birds, but yet they kill flies at least. The dove does nothing of this sort, for it does not feed on what is dead. They who have torn the Church feed on the dead. God is mighty; let us pray that they who are devoured by them, and perceive it not, may come to life again. Many acknowledge that they do come to life again, for at their coming we daily express joy with them in the name of Christ. Be ye simple, but only in such wise that ye be fervent, and let your fervor be in your tongues. Hold not your peace, speak with glowing tongues, set those that are cold on fire.

For why, my brethren? Who does not see what they do not? And no wonder; for they who are unwilling to return from that are just like the raven that was sent forth from the ark. For who does not see what they see not? They are unthankful even to the Holy Spirit Himself. See, the dove descended upon the Lord, upon the Lord when baptized: and thereupon was manifested that holy and real Trinity, which to us is one God. For the Lord went up out of the water, as we read in the Gospel: "And, lo, the heavens were opened unto Him, and He saw the Spirit descending like a dove, and it abode upon Him: and immediately a voice followed, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." The Trinity most manifestly appears: the Father in the voice, the Son in the man, the Spirit in the dove.

"And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon Him. And I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him, the same is He who baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God." Give heed for a little, beloved. When did John learn Christ? For he was sent to baptize with water. They asked, Wherefore? That He might be made manifest to Israel, he said. Of what profit was the baptism of John? My brethren, if it had profited in any respect, it would have remained now, and men would have been baptized with the baptism of John, and thus have come to the baptism of Christ. But what saith he? "That He might be made manifest to Israel,"--that is, to Israel itself, to the people Israel, so that Christ might be made manifest to it,--therefore he came baptizing with water. John received the ministry of baptism, that by the water of repentance he might prepare the way for the Lord, not being himself the Lord; but where the Lord was known, it was superfluous to prepare for Him the way, for to those who knew Him He became Himself the way; therefore the baptism of John did not last long. But how was the Lord pointed out? Lowly, that John might so receive a baptism in which the Lord Himself should be baptized.

But that you may know, my brethren, that not from a necessity of any chain of sin did the Lord come to this John, as the other evangelists say when the Lord came to him to be baptized, John himself said, "Comest Thou to me? I have need to be baptized of Thee." What did He reply to him? "Suffer it to be so now: let all righteousness be fulfilled?" What meaneth this, "let all righteousness be fulfilled"? I came to die for men, have I not to be baptized for men? What meaneth "let all righteousness be fulfilled"? Let all humility be fulfilled. What then? Was not He to accept baptism from a good servant who accepted suffering at the hands of evil servants? Give heed then. The Lord being baptized, if John for this end baptized, that by means of his baptism the Lord might manifest His humility, should no one else have been baptized with the baptism of John? But many were baptized with the baptism of John. When the Lord was baptized with the baptism of John, the baptism of John ceased. John was forthwith cast into prison. Afterwards we do not find that any one is baptized with that baptism. If, then, John came baptizing for this end that the humility of the Lord might be made manifest to us, in order that we might not disdain to receive from the Lord that which the Lord had received from a servant, should John have baptized the Lord alone? But if John had baptized the Lord alone, some would have thought that the baptism of John was more holy than that of Christ: as if Christ alone had been found worthy to be baptized with the baptism of John, but the human race with that of Christ. Give heed, beloved brethren. With the baptism of Christ we have been baptized, and not only we, but the whole world, and this will continue to the end. Which of us can in any respect be compared with Christ, whose shoe's latchet John declared himself unworthy to unloose? If, then, the Christ, a man of such excellence, a man who is God, had been alone baptized with the baptism of John, what were men likely to say? What a baptism was that of John! His was a great baptism, an ineffable sacrament; behold, Christ alone deserved to be baptized with the baptism of John. And thus the baptism of the servant would appear greater than the baptism of the Lord. Others were also baptized with the baptism of John, that the baptism of John might not appear better than the baptism of Christ; but baptized also was the Lord, that through the Lord receiving the baptism of the servant, other servants might not disdain to receive the baptism of the Lord: for this end, then, was John sent.

But did he know Christ, or did he not know Him? If he did not know Him, wherefore did He say, when Christ came to the river, "I have need to be baptized of Thee"? that is to say, I know who Thou art. If, then, he already knew Him, assuredly he knew Him when he saw the dove descending. It is evident that the dove did not descend upon the Lord until after He went up out of the water of baptism. "The Lord having been baptized, went up out of the water, and the heavens were opened, and he saw a dove descending on Him." If, then, the dove descended after the baptism, and if, before the Lord was baptized, John said to Him, "Comest Thou to me? I have need to be baptized of Thee;" that is to say, before he knew Him to whom he said, "Comest Thou to me? I have need to be baptized of Thee;"--how then said he, "And I knew Him not: but He who sent me to baptize with water, the same said to me, Upon whom thou seest the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"? It is not an insignificant question, my brethren. If you have seen the question, you have seen not a little; it remains that the Lord give the solution of it. This, however, I say, if you have seen the question, it is no small matter. Behold, John is placed before your eyes, standing beside the river. Behold John the Baptist. Behold, the Lord comes, as yet to be baptized, not yet baptized. Hear the voice of John, "Comest Thou to me? I have need to be baptized of Thee." Behold, already he knew the Lord, by whom He wishes to be baptized. The Lord, having been baptized, goes up out of the water; the heavens are opened, the Spirit descends; then John knows Him. If then for the first time he knew Him, why did he say before, "I have need to be baptized of Thee"? But if he did not then recognize Him for the first time, because he knew Him already, what is the meaning of what he said, "I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him, as a dove, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"?

(Tr. iv. c. 12, 13) Now when our Lord became known, it was unnecessary to prepare a way for Him; for to those who knew Him, He became His own way. And therefore John's baptism did not last long, but only so long as to show our Lord's humility. (Tr. v. c. 5.). Our Lord received baptism from a servant, in order to give us such a lesson of humility as might prepare us for receiving the grace of baptism. And that the servant's baptism might not be set before the Lord's, others were baptized with it; who after receiving it, had to receive our Lord's baptism: whereas those who first received our Lord's baptism, did not receive the servant's after.

(de Trin. xv. c. 46. [26.]) This was not however the first occasion of Christ's receiving the unction of the Holy Spirit: viz. Its descent upon Him at His baptism; wherein He condescended to prefigure His body, the Church, wherein those who are baptized receive preeminently the Holy Spirit. For it would be absurd to suppose that at thirty years old, (which was His age, when He was baptized by John,) He received for the first time the Holy Spirit: and that, when He came to that baptism, as He was without sin, so was He without the Holy Spirit. For if even of His servant and forerunner John it is written, He shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from His mother's womb; if He, though sprung from His father's seed, yet received the Holy Ghost, when as yet He was only formed in the womb; what ought we to think and believe of Christ, whose very flesh had not a carnal but spiritual conception?

(de Agon. Christiano, c. 24. [22.]) We do not attribute to Christ only the possession of a real body, and say that the Holy Spirit assumed a false appearance to men's eyes: for the Holy Spirit could no more, in consistency with His nature, deceive men, than could the Son of God. The Almighty God, Who made every creature out of nothing, could as easily form a real body of a dove, without the instrumentality of other doves, as He made a real body in the womb of the Virgin, without the seed of the male.

(in Joan. Tr. vi. sparsim) The Holy Ghost was made to appear visibly in two ways: as a dove, upon our Lord at His baptism; and as a flame upon His disciples, when they were met together: the former shape denoting simplicity, the latter fervency. The dove intimates that souls sanctified by the Spirit should have no guile; the fire, that in that simplicity there should not be coldness. Nor let it disturb thee, that the tongues are cloven; fear no division; unity is assured to us in the dove. It was meet then that the Holy Spirit should be thus manifested descending upon our Lord; in order that every one who had the Spirit might know, that he ought to be simple as a dove, and be in sincere peace with the brethren. The kisses of doves represent this peace. Ravens kiss, but they tear also; but the nature of the dove is most alien to tearing. Ravens feed on the dead, but the dove eats nothing but the fruits of the earth. If doves moan in their love, marvel not that He Who appeared in the likeness of a dove, the Holy Spirit, maketh intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered. (Rom. 8:26) The Holy Spirit however groaneth not in Himself, but in us: He maketh us to groan. And he who groaneth, as knowing that, so long as He is under the burden of this mortality, he is absent from the Lord, groaneth well: it is the Spirit that hath taught him to groan. But many groan because of earthly calamities; because of losses which disquiet them, or bodily sickness which weigh heavily on them: they groan not, as doth the dove. What then could more fitly represent the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of unity, than the dove? as He saith Himself to His reconciled Church, My dove is one. (Cant. 6:9) What could better express humility, than the simplicity and moaning of a dove? Wherefore on this occasion it was that there appeared the very most Holy Trinity, the Father in the voice which said, Thou art My beloved Son; the Holy Spirit in the likeness of the dove. (Matt. 28:19) In that Trinity the Apostles were sent to baptize, i. e. in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

(Aug. Tr. v. c. i) But who sent John? If we say the Father, we say true; if we say the Son, we say true. But it would be truer to say, the Father and the Son. How then knew he not Him, by Whom he was sent? For if he knew not Him, by Whom he wished to be baptized, it was rash in him to say, I have need to be baptized by Thee. So then he knew Him; and why saith he, I knew Him not?

(Aug. Tr. iv.v. and vi. sparsim.) Let us turn to the other Evangelists, who relate the matter more clearly, and we shall find most satisfactorily, that the dove descended when our Lord ascended from the water. If then the dove descended after baptism, but John said before the baptism, I have need to be baptized of Thee, he knew Him before His baptism also. How then said he, I knew him not, but He which sent me to baptize? Was this the first revelation made to John of Christ's person, or was it not rather a fuller disclosure of what had been already revealed? John knew the Lord to be the Son of God, knew that He would baptize with the Holy Ghost: for before Christ came to the river, many having come together to hear John, he said unto them, He that cometh after me is mightier than I: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. (Matt. 3:11) What then? He did not know that our Lord (lest Paul or Peter might say, my baptism, as we find Paul did say, my Gospel,) would have and retain to Himself the power of baptism, the ministering of it however passing to good and bad indiscriminately. What hindrance is the badness of the minister, when the Lord is good? So then we baptize again after John's baptism; after a homicide's we baptize not: because John gave his own baptism, the homicide gives Christ's; which is so holy a sacrament, that not even a homicide's ministration can pollute it. Our Lord could, had He so willed, have given power to any servant of His to give baptism as it were in His own stead; and to the baptism, thus transferred to the servant, have imparted the same power, that it would have had, when given by Himself. But this He did not choose to do; that the hope of the baptized might be directed to Him, Who had baptized them; He wished not the servant to place hope in the servant. And again, had He given this power to servants, there would have been as many baptisms as servants; as there had been the baptism of John, so should we have had the baptism of Paul and of Peter. It is by this power then, which Christ retains in His own possession exclusively, that the unity of the Church is established; of which it is said, My dove is one. (Cant. 6:9) A man may have a baptism besides the dove; but that any besides the dove should profit, is impossible.

(Tr. vii. in Joan) It was necessary that the Only Son of God should baptize, not an adopted son. Adopted sons are ministers of the Only Son: but though they have the ministration, the Only one alone has the power.

To appear denotes a sensible effect with express signification, as the Holy Spirit appeared in a dove. And since, just as the divine persons are distinct, so they can be distinctly signified both by signs and by names, therefore any person can appear by itself, and apparition can belong to all, whether together or to any one by itself. Whence that the Holy Spirit is said to have appeared in tongues of fire and in a dove, this is not on account of a new bond or a special effect, but on account of the union which exists between the thing signified and the sign specially and by manner and origin assigned to it.

"And John bore witness," as one who was certain, "saying: Because I saw the Spirit descending as a dove from heaven"; Luke 3: "The Holy Spirit descended in bodily form as a dove upon him." "And remaining upon him," because he rested in him; Isaiah 11: "The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him." And this was the sign certifying him.

But here it is asked concerning the descent of the Holy Spirit. For if the Holy Spirit is God, and God is everywhere, then he does not descend. If you say that he did not descend by essence but by effect: No new effect was conferred upon Christ, because he had no gift of grace then that he did not have from the conception: therefore he did not descend by effect.

It must be said that God is said to be in creatures in four ways: in the first way, purely by reason of being: and thus he is in all things and equally, and neither descends nor moves nor withdraws. In the second way, by reason of signifying or showing; thus God was said to be in those creatures which signified him, as on Mount Sinai and in the cloud. In the third way, by reason of bestowing grace: thus he is said to be in those whom he loves and who love him. Fourth, by reason of uniting or assuming; thus in Christ. In the first mode of existing, therefore, because it is universal and common, neither descent nor ascent corresponds to it; but in the other modes they do. Since, therefore, that dove was instituted for this purpose and specially manifested the Spirit, He is said to have descended in it, not in another, not by reason of effect or union, but of manifestation.

To the question: why did He manifest Himself through a dove rather than something else? The response is: on account of the properties of the dove, because the dove is a simple animal, gentle and fruitful. The Holy Spirit, however, is benign and fruitful and without guile: "For the Holy Spirit will flee from the feigned."

CHAPTER I. That the Holy Ghost is in the Son not by participation, not from without, but Essentially and by Nature.

Having said above that he knew Him not, he profitably explains and uncovers the Divine Mystery, both showing that He Who told him was God the Father, and clearly relating the manner of the revelation. By all does he profit the mind of the headers; and whereby he says that the Mystery of Christ to men-ward was taught him of God, he shows that his opposers are fighting against the decree from above, and to their own peril arraying themselves against the mighty purpose of the Father. For this was the part of one skillfully persuading them to desist from their vain counsel, and to receive Him Who by the goodwill of the Father came for the salvation of all. He therefore testifieth, both that he saw the Spirit descending from Heaven upon Him, in the form of a Dove, and that It abode upon Him. Then besides, he says that himself was the ear-witness of Him Who sent him to baptize with water, that He upon Whom the Spirit came and abode upon Him is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. Most worthy of belief then the witness, supernatural the sign, above all the Father Who revealed.

And these things are thus. But perchance the heretic fond of carping will jump up, and with a big laugh, say; What again, sirs, say ye to this too, or what argument will ye bring forth, wresting that which is written? Lo, he saith that the Spirit descendeth upon the Son; lo, He is anointed by God the Father; That Which He hath not, He receives forsooth, the Psalmist co-witnessing with us and saying, as to Him: Wherefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy fellows. How then will the Son any more be Consubstantial with the Perfect Father, not being Himself Perfect, and therefore anointed? To this then I think it right to say to those who overturn the holy doctrines of the Church, and pervert the truth of the Scriptures: Awake, ye drunkards, from your wine, that viewing the clear beauty of the truth, ye may be able with us to cry to the Son: Of a truth Thou art the Son of God. For if thou fully believe that He is by Nature God, how will He not have perfection? For time is it that ye now speak impiously against the Father Himself also: for whence must He needs, as thou sayest, have perfection? how will He not be brought down to the abasement of His Offspring, which according to you is imperfect, in that the Divine Essence in the Son has once received the power of not having Perfection, according to your unlearned and uninstructed reasoning? For we will not divide that Great and Untaint Nature into different Words, so that it should be imperfect perchance in one, and again Perfect in the other. Since the definition of human nature too is one in respect of all men, and equal in all of us, what man will be less, qua man? but neither will he be considered more so than another. And I suppose that one angel will differ in nothing from another angel in respect of their being what they are, angels to wit, from sameness of nature, being all linked with one another unto one nature. How then can the Nature Which is Divine and surpassing all, show Itself in a state inferior to things originate in Its own special good, and endure a condition which the creature cannot endure? How will It be at all simple and uncompounded, if Perfection and imperfection appear in It? For It will be compounded of both, since Perfection is not of the same kind as imperfection. For if they be of the same kind, and there be no difference between them, every thing which is perfect will without distinction be also imperfect: and if ought again be imperfect, this too will be perfect. And the charge against the Son will be nought, even though according to your surmisings He appear not Perfect: but neither will the Father Himself, though witnessed to in respect of His Perfection, surpass the Son, and there is an end of our dispute. But if much interval severs imperfection from perfection, and the Divine Nature admits both together, It is compound, and not simple.

But perchance some one will say, that contraries are incompatible, and not co-existent in one subject at the same time, as for instance in a body white and black skin together. Well, my friend, and very bravely hast thou backed up my argument. For if the Divine Nature be One, and there be none other than It, how, tell me, will It admit of contraries? How will things unlike to one another come together into one subject? But since the Father is by Nature God, the Son too is by Nature God. He will therefore in nothing differ, in respect of being Perfect, from the Father, since He is begotten of His Divine and most Perfect Essence. For must not He needs be Perfect Who is of a Perfect Parent, since He is both His exact Likeness, and the express Image of His Person, as it is written? But every one will I suppose consent and agree to this. Or let him come forward and say, how the Son is the exact Image of the Perfect Father, not having Perfection in His Own Nature, according to the uncounsel of some. For since He is the Impress and Image, He is Himself too perfect as He, Whose Image He is.

But, says one, John saw the Spirit descending from Heaven upon the Son, and He has Sanctification from without, for He receives it as not having it. Time then is it to call Him openly a creature, barely honoured with a little excellence, perfected and sanctified in equal rank with the rest, and having His supply of good things an acquired one. Then how does the Evangelist not lie, when he says, Of His fulness have all we received? For how will He be full in His Own Nature, Who Himself receiveth from Another? Or how will God be at all conceived of as Father if the Only-Begotten is a creature, and not rather Son? For if this be so, both Himself will be falsely called Father, and the Son will not be Truth, having upon Him a spurious dignity, and a title of bare words. The whole therefore will come to nothing; the Father being neither truly father, nor the Son this by Nature, which He is said to be. But if God be truly Father, He surely has whereof He is Father, the Son, that is, of Himself.

Then how will the Godhead Holy by Nature beget that of Itself which is void of holiness, and bring forth Its own Fruit destitute of Its own inherent Properties? For if He hath sanctification from without, as they babbling say;----they must needs confess, even against their will, that He Was not always holy, but became so afterwards, when the Spirit descended upon Him, as John saith. How then was the Son holy even before the Incarnation? for so did the Seraphim glorify Him, repeating the Holy, in order, from the first to the third time. If then He was holy, even before the Incarnation, yea rather being ever with the Father, how needed He a sanctifier, and this in the last times, when He became Man? I marvel how this too escapes them, with all their love of research. For must we not needs conceive, that the Son could at any time reject sanctification, if it be not in Him essentially, but came to Him as it does to us, or any other reasonable creature? But that which falls away from sanctification, will it not be altogether under the bonds of sin, and sink to the worse, no longer retaining power to be apart from vice? Therefore neither will the Son be found to be unchangeable, and the Psalmist will lie crying in the Spirit as to Him, But Thou art the Same.

Besides what has been already said, let this too be considered, for it brings in a kindred idea: All reasoning will demonstrate that the partaken is somewhat other by nature than the partaker. For if this be not true, but that shall in no wise differ from this, and is the same; that which partakes of ought partakes of itself, which is incredible even to think of (for how can any one be imagined to partake of himself?). But if the things mentioned lie altogether in natural diversity one to another, and the necessity of reasoning separates them, let them who give the Spirit by participation to the Only-Begotten, see to what a depth of impiety they sink unawares. For if the Son is partaker of the Spirit, and the Spirit is by Nature holy, He Himself will not be by Nature holy, but is shown to be hardly so through combination with another, transelemented by grace to the better, than that wherein He was at first. But let the fighter against God again see, into how great impiety the question casts him down. For first some change and turning, as we said before, will be found to exist respecting the Son. And being according to you changed, and having advanced unto the better, He will be shown to be not only not inferior to the Father, but even somehow to have become superior: and how this is, we will say, taking it from the Divine Scripture. The divine Paul says somewhere of Him: Be each among you so 1 minded, according to what was also in Christ Jesus, Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied Himself, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, and being found in fashion as a Man, He humbled Himself. Since then even before the Incarnation, He was in the form and equality of the Father, but at the time of the Incarnation receiving the Spirit from Heaven was sanctified, according to them, and became by reason of this better alike and greater than Himself, He surpasses at length it is plain even the measure of His Father. And if on receiving the Spirit He mounted up unto dignity above that of the Father, then is the Spirit superior even to the Father Himself, seeing that He bestows on the Son the superiority over Him. Who then will not shudder at the mere hearing of this? For hard is it in truth even to go through such arguments, but no otherwise can the harm of their stubbornness be driven off. Therefore we will say again to them: If when the Word of God became Man, He is then also sanctified by receiving the Spirit: but before the Incarnation was in the Form and Equality of the Father, not yet according to them sanctified, time is it they should boldly say, that God the Father is not holy, if the Word Who is in all things altogether Con-formal and Equal to Him, was not holy in the beginning, but barely in the last times became so. And again, if He is truly the Word of God, Who receiveth the Spirit, and is sanctified in His Own Nature, let our opponents say, whether in doing this, He became greater or less than Himself, or remained the Same. For if He hath nothing more from the Spirit, but remaineth the same as He was, be not offended at learning that It descended on Him. But if He was injured by receiving It, and became less, you will introduce to us the Word as passible, and will accuse the Essence of the Father as wronging rather than sanctifying. But if He became better by receiving the Spirit, but was in the Form and Equality of the Father, even before, according to you, He became bettered, the Father hath not attained unto the height of glory, but will be in that measure of it, in which the Son Who hath advanced to the better was Con-formal and Equal to Him. Convenient is it then, I deem, to say to the ill-instructed heretics, Behold o foolish people and without understanding, which have eyes, and see not; which have ears and hear not; for the god of this world hath indeed blinded the eyes of them, which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ should shine unto them: worthy of pity are they rather than of anger. For they understand not, what they read.

But that the reasoning is true, will be clear from hence, even if we have not, by our previous attempts, made the demonstration perfectly clear. Again shall this that is spoken by the mouth of Paul be brought forward: Be each among you, saith he, so minded, according to what was also in Christ Jesus, Who being in the Form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied Himself, and took upon Him the Form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, and being found in fashion as a Man, He humbled Himself. Lo, he much marvels at the Son, as being Equal and Con-formal with God the Father, not, by reason of His Love to us, seizing this, but descending to lowliness, through the Form of a servant, emptied by reason of His Manhood. But if, sirs, He on receiving the Spirit were sanctified rather, when He became Man, and were, through the sanctification, rendered superior to Himself, into what kind of lowliness shall we see Him to have descended? How is That made low that was exalted, how did That descend that was sanctified, or how did it not rather ascend, and was exalted for the better? What emptiness hath filling through the Spirit? or how will He at all be thought to have been Incarnate for our sakes, Who underwent so great profit in respect of Himself? How did the Rich become poor for our sakes, who was enriched because of us? How was He rich even before His Advent, Who according to them received in it what He had not, to wit the Spirit? Or how will He not rather justly offer to us thank-offering for what by means of us He gained? Be astonished, as it is written, O ye heavens, at this: and be horribly afraid, saith the Lord: for the people of the heretics have in truth committed two evils, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm, and think it not grievous thus to incur such danger in the weightiest matters. For else would they, shedding bitter tears from their eyes, and lifting up a mighty voice on high, have approached, saying, Set a watch, O Lord, before my mouth, keep the door of my lips. Incline not my heart to words of wickedness. For words of wickedness in truth are their words, travailing with extremest mischief to the hearers. But we, having expelled their babbling from our heart, will walk in the right way of the faith, bearing in mind that which is written: Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ. Come then, and bringing into captivity our mind as to the subjects before us, let us subject it to the glory of the Only-Begotten, bringing all things wisely to His obedience, that is, to the mode of the Incarnation. For, being Rich, for our sakes He became poor, that we through His poverty might be rich.

Receive then, if you please, our proof through that also which is now before us, opening a forbearing ear to our words. The Divine Scripture testifies that man was made in the Image and Likeness of God Who is over all. And indeed, he who compiled the first book for us (Moses, who above all men was known to God) says, And God created man, in the Image of God created He him. But that through the Spirit he was sealed unto the Divine Image, himself again taught us, saying, And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. For the Spirit at once began both to put life into His formation and in a Divine manner to impress His own Image thereon. Thus the most excellent Artificer God, having formed the reasonable living creature upon the earth, gave him the saving commandment. And he was in Paradise, as it is written, still keeping the Gift, and eminent in the Divine Image of Him That made him, through the Holy Ghost That indwelt him. But when perverted by the wiles of the devil, he began to despise his Creator, and by trampling on the law assigned him, to grieve his Benefactor, He recalled the grace given to him, and he that was made unto life then first heard Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. And now the Likeness to God was through the inroad of sin defaced, and no longer was the Impress bright, but fainter and darkened because of the transgression. But when the race of man had reached to an innumerable multitude, and sin had dominion over them all, manifoldly despoiling each man's soul, his nature was stripped of the ancient grace; the Spirit departed altogether, and the reasonable creature fell into extremest folly, ignorant even of its Creator. But the Artificer of all, having endured a long season, at length pities the corrupted world, and being Good hastened to gather together to those above His runaway flock upon earth; and decreed to trans-element human nature anew to the pristine Image through the Spirit. For no otherwise was it possible that the Divine Impress should again shine forth in him, as it did aforetime.

What then He contrives to this end, how He implanted in us the inviolate grace, or how the Spirit again took root in man, |142 in what manner nature was re-formed to its old condition, it is meet to say. The first man, being earthy, and of the earth, and having, placed in his own power, the choice between good and evil, being master of the inclination to each, was caught of bitter guile, and having inclined to disobedience, falls to the earth, the mother from whence he sprang, and over-mastered now at length by corruption and death, transmits the penalty to his whole race. The evil growing and multiplying in us, and our understanding ever descending to the worse, sin reigned, and thus at length the nature of man was shown bared of the Holy Ghost Which indwelt him. For the Holy Spirit of wisdom will flee deceit, as it is written, nor dwell in the body that is subject unto sin. Since then the first Adam preserved not the grace given him of God, God the Father was minded to send us from Heaven the second Adam. For He sendeth in our likeness His own Son Who is by Nature without variableness or change, and wholly unknowing of sin, that as by the disobedience of the first, we became subject to Divine wrath, so through the obedience of the Second, we might both escape the curse, and its evils might come to nought. But when the Word of God became Man, He received the Spirit from the Father as one of us, (not receiving ought for Himself individually, for He was the Giver of the Spirit); but that He Who knew no sin, might, by receiving It as Man, preserve It to our nature, and might again inroot in us the grace which had left us. For this reason, I deem, it was that the holy Baptist profitably added, I saw the Spirit descending from Heaven, and It abode upon Him. For It had fled from us by reason of sin, but He Who knew no sin, became as one of us, that the Spirit might be accustomed to abide in us, having no occasion of departure or withdrawal in Him.

Therefore through Himself He receives the Spirit for us, and renews to our nature, the ancient good. For thus is He also said for our sakes to become poor. For being rich, as God and lacking no good thing, He became Man lacking all things, to whom it is somewhere said and that very well, What hast thou that thou didst not receive? As then, being by Nature Life, He died in the Flesh for our sakes, that He might overcome death for us, and raise up our whole nature together with Himself (for all we were in Him, in that He was made Man): so does He also receive the Spirit for our sakes, that He may sanctify our whole nature. For He came not to profit Himself, but to be to all us the Door and Beginning and Way of the Heavenly Goods. For if He had not pleased to receive, as Man, or to suffer too, as one of us, how could any one have shown that He humbled Himself? or how would the Form of a servant have been fittingly kept, if nothing befitting a servant were written of Him? Let not then the all-wise account of the dispensation be pulled to pieces, whereof the divine Paul himself rightly cries in admiration: To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord. For wisdom indeed and God-befitting, is the great mystery of the Incarnation seen to be.

Such an apprehension of our Saviour do I suppose that we who choose to be pious, and rejoice in orthodox doctrines, ought to have. For we too will not descend to such lack of reason as to suppose that in the Son by Nature was the Spirit by participation and not rather essentially inherent even as in the Father Himself. For as of the Father, so also of the Son, is the Holy Ghost. So did we also read in the Divine Scriptures. For it says: After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not.

But if it seem good to any one, with over contentious zeal, to object to our words hereon, and to assert again, that the Spirit is in the Son by participation, or that, not being in Him before, He then came to be in Him, when He was baptized, in the period of His Incarnation, let him see, into what and how great absurdities he will fall. For first, the Saviour saith: Among them that are born of women there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist. And the word is true: but we see him who hath attained to the summit of glory and virtue that belong to us, honouring Christ with incomparable excellencies. For I am not worthy, says he, to stoop down and unloose the latchet of His shoes. How then is it not absurd, yea rather impious, to believe that John was filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb, because it is so written of him: and to suppose that his Master, yea rather the Master and Lord of all, then first received the Spirit, when He was baptized, albeit holy Gabriel says to the holy Virgin: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy Thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God. And let the lover of learning see, with how great a meaning the word travaileth. For of John, it saith, he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost (for the Holy Ghost was in him as a gift, and not essentially), but of the Saviour, he no longer saith shall be filled, (in rightness of conception,) but that holy Thing which shall be born of thee. Nor did he add shall be, for It was always Holy by Nature, as God.

But since I deem that we ought to seek after what is profitable from all quarters; the voice of the archangel having been once brought forward, come, let us exercise ourselves a little in it. The Holy Ghost, says he, shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also That Holy Thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God. Let him then, who from great unlearning, opposeth the right doctrines of the Church, tell us, whether even before the Incarnation the the Word of God the Father was Son, or had the glory in name only, but was a bastard, and falsely called. For if he say that He was not the Son at all, he will deny the Father (for of whom will He be the Father, if He have no Son?): and he will think contrary to all the Divine Scriptures. But if he confess that the Son even before the Incarnation both was and was called Son, how does the Archangel tell us that That which should be born of the holy Virgin shall be called the Son of God, albeit He was this by Nature even long before? As therefore the Son being from eternity with the Father, as having Origin of Being, is at the time of His Incarnation called Son of God, from His appearing in the world with a Body; so, having in Himself Essentially His Own Spirit, He is said to receive It as Man, preserving to the Humanity the order befitting it, and with it appropriating for our sakes the things befitting it. But how can the Word be thought of at all apart from Its Own Spirit? For would it not be absurd to say, that the spirit of man, which is in him, according to the definition of nature, and for the completeness of the living-being, was separated from him? But I suppose that this is most evident to all. How then shall we sever the Spirit from the Son, Which is so inherent and essentially united, and through Him proceeding and being in Him by Nature, that It cannot be thought to be Other than He by reason both of Identity of working, and the very exact likeness of Nature. Hear what the Saviour saith to His own disciples, If ye love Me, keep My Commandments, and I will pray the Father, and He shall give you Another Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, Whom the world cannot receive. Lo, plainly He calls the Holy Ghost Spirit of Truth. But that He and none other than He is the Truth, hear Him again saying, I am the Truth. The Son by Nature then being and being called Truth, see how great Oneness with Him the Spirit hath. For the disciple John saith somewhere of our Saviour, This is He that came by water and blood and the spirit, Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood: and it is the Spirit That beareth witness, because the Spirit is Truth. Therefore also, the Holy Ghost indwelling in our inner man, Christ Himself is said to dwell therein, and so it is. And indeed the blessed Paul most clearly teaching this, says, But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, If so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. And if Christ be in you, the body |146 is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Apply, sir, a quick ear to what is said. Having named the Spirit of Christ That dwelleth in us, he straightway added, If Christ be in you, introducing the exact likeness of the Son with the Spirit, Which is His Own and proceeding from Him by Nature. Therefore He is called the Spirit of adoption also, and in Him we cry Abba, Father. And as the blessed John somewhere says, Hereby know we that He dwelleth in us, because He hath given us of His Spirit.

I think then that these things will suffice, to enable the children of the Church to repel the mischief of the heretics. But if any one be soused in the unmixed strong drink of their unlearning, and suppose that the Son then first received the Spirit, when He became Man: let him show that the Word of God was not holy before the Incarnation, and we will hold our peace.

But one may well wonder that the holy Evangelist every where preserves with much observance what befits the Divine Nature. For since he said above, that no man hath seen God at any time, and now says that the blessed Baptist saw the Spirit descend from Heaven upon the Son, he adds of necessity, I saw the Spirit, but in the form of a Dove, not Himself by Nature, as He is, but shadowed in the gentlest animal; that in this again He might be shown to preserve His Natural Affinity and Likeness to the Son, Who saith, Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart. Therefore the Spirit will not fall away from being God by Nature: for the never having been seen at any time has been preserved to Him, save under the form of a dove, by reason of the need of the disciple. For the blessed Baptist says that the descent of the Spirit was given him by way of a sign and token, adding to his testimonies respecting our Saviour, He that sent me to baptize with water, the Same said unto me, Upon Whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, the Same is He Which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. Therefore I think we may fitly laugh to scorn those senseless heretics who take as matter of fact, that which was set forth by way of sign, even though it took place as part of the oeconomy, as hath been already said, for the need's sake of the human race.

It is written in the Gospel that the one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining on, this is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. For the Spirit descends on all the faithful. But he only remains on the mediator—and does so in a special way. For he has never left the Son's human nature even as he proceeds from his divine nature.… But when the voice of truth tells the disciples that this same Spirit, "will dwell with you and shall be in you," how is this abiding of the Spirit declared by the voice of God supposed to be a peculiar sign of the mediator?… This will appear if we distinguish between the different gifts of the Spirit. There are some gifts which are necessary for attaining life and there are others through which holiness of life becomes evident for the good of others. Gentleness, humility, faith, hope and charity are all gifts that come from the Spirit and are gifts a person needs in order to attain life.… In the case of these gifts … the Holy Spirit always remains.… But with respect to those which have for their object, not our own salvation, but that of others, he does not always abide.… Instead, sometimes he withdraws and ceases to exhibit them so that people should be more humble in the possession of his gifts.… But the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, always had all the gifts of the Spirit without interruption.

"How then didst thou know Him?" "By the descent of the Spirit," he saith. But again, test any one should suppose that he was in need of the Spirit as we are, hear how he removes the suspicion, by showing that the descent of the Spirit was only to declare Christ. For having said, "And I knew Him not," he adds "But He that sent me to baptize with water the Same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."

Seest thou that this was the work of the Spirit, to point out Christ? The testimony of John was indeed not to be suspected, but wishing to make it yet more credible, he leads it up to God and the Holy Spirit. For when John had testified to a thing so great and wonderful, so fit to astonish all his hearers, that He alone took on Him the sins of all the world, and that the greatness of the gift sufficed for so great a ransom, afterwards he proves this assertion. And the proof is that He is the Son of God, and that He needed not baptism, and that the object of the descent of the Spirit was only to make Him known. For it was not in the power of John to give the Spirit, as those who were baptized by him show when they say, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." In truth, Christ needed not baptism, neither his nor any other; but rather baptism needed the power of Christ. For that which was wanting was the crowning blessing of all, that he who was baptized should be deemed worthy of the Spirit; this free gift then of the Spirit He added when He came.

"And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from the heaven like a dove, and It abode upon Him. And I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the Same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God."

He puts the "I knew Him not" repeatedly. On what account, and wherefore? He was His kinsman according to the flesh. "Behold," saith the angel, "thy cousin Elisabeth, she also hath received a son." That therefore he might not seem to favor Him because of the relationship, he repeats the "I knew Him not." And this happened with good reason; for he had passed all his time in the wilderness away from his father's house.

How then, if he knew Him not before the descent of the Spirit, and if he then for the first time recognized Him, did he forbid Him before baptism, saying, "I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?" since this was a proof that he knew Him very well. Yet he knew Him not before or for a long time, and with good cause; for the marvels which took place when He was a child, as the circumstances of the Magi and others the like, had happened long before, while John himself was very young, and since much time had elapsed in the interval, He was naturally unknown to all. For had He been known, John would not have said, "That He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing."

Hence it remains clear to us, that the miracles which they say belong to Christ's childhood, are false, and the inventions of certain who bring them into notice. For if He had begun from His early age to work wonders, neither could John have been ignorant of Him, nor would the multitude have needed a teacher to make Him known.

"But," says one, "how then did not the Jews believe? for it was not John only that saw the Spirit in the likeness of a dove." It was, because, even if they did see, such things require not only the eyes of the body, but more than these, the vision of the understanding, to prevent men from supposing the whole to be a vain illusion. For if when they saw Him working wonders, touching with His own hands the sick and the dead, and so bringing them back to life and health, they were so drunk with malice as to declare the contrary of what they saw; how could they shake off their unbelief by the descent of the Spirit only? And some say, that they did not all see it, but only John and those of them who were better disposed. Because even though it were possible with fleshly eyes to see the Spirit descending as in the likeness of a dove, still not for this was it absolutely necessary that the circumstance should be visible to all. For Zacharias saw many things in a sensible form, as did Daniel and Ezekiel, and had none to share in what they saw; Moses also saw many things such as none other hath seen; nor did all the disciples enjoy the view of the Transfiguration on the mount, nor did they all alike behold Him at the time of the Resurrection. And this Luke plainly shows, when he says, that He showed Himself "to witnesses chosen before of God."

Here it is evident that the Spirit descending like a dove on the baptized Lord was not seen by all those present, but by John only in a sort of spiritual vision. Similarly, the prophets amid many people were used to seeing those things that were invisible to all the others. It would have been useless to say that John testified and said, "I saw the Spirit," if all those present had been participants in that vision as well.

267 Then when he says, John gave this testimony also, he confirms by the authority of God the great things he testified to about Christ, that Christ alone would take away the sins of the whole world. As to this he does three things. First, he presents a vision. Secondly, he tells us the meaning of the vision (v 33). Thirdly, he shows what he learned from this vision (v 34).

268 He presents the vision when he says, I saw the Spirit coming down on him from heaven. When this actually happened John the Evangelist does not tell us, but Matthew and Luke say that it took place when Christ was being baptized by John. And it was indeed fitting for the Holy Spirit to be present at this baptism and to the person being baptized. It was appropriate for the one baptized, for as the Son, existing by the Father, manifests the Father, "Father, I have manifested your name" (below 17:6), so the Holy Spirit, existing by the Son, manifests the Son, "He will glorify me, because he will receive from me" (below 16:14). It was appropriate for this baptism because the baptism of Christ begins and consecrates our baptism. Now our baptism is consecrated by invoking the whole Trinity: "Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Mt 28:19). Thus, the ones we invoke in our baptism were present at the baptism of Christ: the Father in the voice, the Holy Spirit in the dove, and the Son in his human nature.

269 He says, coming down, because descent, since it has two termini, the start, which is from above, and the end, which is below, suits baptism in both respects. For there is a twofold spirit: one of the world and the other of God. The spirit of the world is the love of the world, which is not from above; rather, it comes up to man from below and makes him descend. But the spirit of God, i.e., the love of God, comes down to man from above and makes him ascend: "We have not received the spirit of this world, but the spirit of God," as is said in 1 Corinthians (2:12). And so, because that spirit is from above, he says, coming down.

Similarly, because it is impossible for the creature to receive God's goodness in the fulness in which it is present in God, the communication of this goodness to us is in a way a certain coming down: "Every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights" (Jas 1:17).

270 The Evangelist, in describing the manner of the vision and of the coming down, says that the Holy Spirit did not appear in the spirit, i.e., in his nature, but in the form of a dove, saying, that he came like a dove. The reason for this is that the Holy Spirit cannot be seen in his nature, as is said, "The Spirit blows where it wills, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes" (below 3:8), and because a spirit does not come down but goes up, "The spirit lifted me up" (Ez 8:3).

It was appropriate that the Son of God, who was made visible through flesh, should be made known by the Holy Spirit in the visible form of a dove. However, the Holy Spirit did not assume the dove into a unity of person, as the Son of God assumed human nature. The reason for this is that the Son did not appear as a manifester but as a Savior. And so, according to Pope Leo, it was appropriate that he be God and man: God, in order to provide a remedy; and man, in order to offer an example. But the Holy Spirit appeared only to make known, and for this it was sufficient merely to assume a visible form which was suitable for this purpose.

271 As to whether this dove was a real animal and whether it existed prior to its appearance, it seems reasonable to say that it was a real dove. For the Holy Spirit came to manifest Christ, who, being the Truth, ought to have been manifested only by the truth. As to the other part of the question, it would seem that the dove did not exist prior to its appearance, but was formed at the time by the divine power, without any parental union, as the body of Christ was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, and not from a man's seed. Yet it was a real dove, for as Augustine says in his work, The Christian Combat: "It was not difficult for the omnipotent God, who produced the entire universe of creatures from nothing, to form a real body for the dove without the aid of other doves, just as it was not difficult to form the true body of Christ in the womb of the Blessed Virgin without natural semen."

Cyprian, in his The Unity of the Church, says: "It is said that the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove because the dove is a simple harmless animal, not bitter with gall, not savage with its bites, not fierce with rending talons; it loves the dwellings of men, is able to live together in one nest, together it raises its young, they remain together when they fly, spend their life in mutual association, signify the concord of peace with the kiss of their bill, and fulfill the law of harmony in all things."

272 Many reasons are given why the Holy Spirit appeared as a dove rather than in some other form. First, because of its simplicity, for the dove is simple: "Be wise as serpents, and simple as doves" (Mt 10:16). And the Holy Spirit, because he inclines souls to gaze on one thing, that is, God, makes them simple; and so he appeared in the form of a dove. Further, according to Augustine, the Holy Spirit also appeared in the form of fire over the heads of the assembled apostles. This was done because some are simple, but lukewarm; while others are fervent but guileful. And so in order that those sanctified by the Spirit may have no guile, the Spirit is shown in the form of a dove; and in order that their simplicity may not grow tepid, the Spirit is shown in fire.

A dove was used, secondly, because of the unity of charity; for the dove is much aglow with love: "One is my dove" (Sg 6:9). So, in order to show the unity of the Church, the Holy Spirit appears in the form of a dove. Nor should it disturb you that when the Holy Spirit rested on each of the disciples, there appeared separate tongues of fire; for although the Spirit appears to be different according to the different functions of his gifts, he nevertheless unites us through charity. And so, because of the first he appeared in separate tongues of fire, as is said, "There are different kinds of gifts" (1 Cor 12:4); but he appears in the form of a dove because of the second.

A dove was used, thirdly, because of its groaning, for the dove has a groaning chant; so also the Holy Spirit "pleads for us with indescribable groanings" (Rom 8:26); "Her maidens, groaning like doves" (Na 2:7). Fourthly, because of the dove's fertility, for the dove is a very prolific animal. And so in order to signify the fecundity of spiritual grace in the Church, the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove. This is why the Lord commanded an offering of two doves (Lv 5:7).

A dove was used, fifthly, because of its cautiousness. For it rests upon watery brooks, and gazing into them can see the hawk flying overhead and so save itself: "His eyes are like doves beside brooks of water" (Sg 5:12). And so, because our refuge and defense is found in baptism, the Holy Spirit appropriately appeared in the form of a dove.

The dove also corresponds to a figure in the Old Testament. For as the dove bearing the green olive branch was a sign of God's mercy to those who survived the waters of the deluge, so too in baptism, the Holy Spirit, coming in the form of a dove, is a sign of the divine mercy which takes away the sins of those baptized and confers grace.

273 He says that the Holy Spirit was resting on him. If the Holy Spirit does not rest on someone, it is due to two causes. One is sin. For all men except Christ are either suffering from the wound of mortal sin, which banishes the Holy Spirit, or are darkened with the stain of venial sin, which hinders some of the works of the Holy Spirit. But in Christ there was neither mortal nor venial sin; so, the Holy Spirit in him was never disquieted, but was resting on him.

The other reason concerns charismatic graces, for the other saints do not always possess their power. For example, the power to work miracles is not always present in the saints, nor is the spirit of prophecy always in the prophets. But Christ always possessed the power to accomplish any work of the virtues and the graces. So to indicate this, he says, resting on him. Hence this was the characteristic sign for recognizing Christ, as the Gloss says. "The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him" (Is 11:2), which we should understand of Christ as man, according to which he is less than the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Now this it was in Him that John saw, and came to know which he did not know. Not that he did not know Him to be the Son of God, or that he did not know Him to be the Lord, or not know Him to be the Christ; or that he did not know this too, that it was He who should baptize with water and with the Holy Ghost. This he did know; but that he should do this so as to retain the authority to Himself and transfer it to none of His ministers, this is what he learnt in the dove. For by this authority, which Christ has retained to Himself alone, and conferred upon none of His ministers, though He has deigned to baptize by His ministers; by this authority, I say, stands the unity of the Church, which is figured in the dove, concerning which it is said, "My dove is one, the only one of her mother." For if, as I have already said, my brethren, the authority were transferred by the Lord to His minister, there would be as many baptisms as ministers, and the unity of baptism would no longer exist.

Mark, brethren; before our Lord Jesus Christ came to His baptism (for it was after the baptism that the dove descended, whereby John recognized something that was peculiar to Him, since he was told, "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending like a dove, and remaining on Him, the same is He that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"), John knew that He it was that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost; but that it should be with this peculiarity, that the authority should not pass from Him to another, notwithstanding He confers it, this is what he learnt there. And whence do we prove that John did already know that the Lord was to baptize with the Holy Ghost; so that what he must be understood to have learned by the dove is, that the Lord was to baptize with the Holy Ghost in such wise that the authority should not pass from Him to any other man? Whence do we prove this? The dove descended after the Lord was baptized; but before the Lord came to be baptized by John in the Jordan, we have said that John knew Him, on the evidence of those words, in which he says, "Comest Thou to me to be baptized? I have need to be baptized of Thee." Well, he did know Him to be the Lord, knew Him to be the Son of God; how do we prove that he knew already that the same was He who should baptize with the Holy Ghost? Before He came to the river, whilst many people were running together to John to be baptized, he says to them, "I indeed baptize you with water; but He that cometh after me is greater than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to loose; the same shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire." Already he knew this also. What then did he learn from the dove, that he may not afterwards be found a liar (which God forbid we should think), if it be not this, that there was to be a certain peculiarity in Christ, such that, although many ministers, be they righteous or unrighteous, should baptize, the virtue of baptism would be attributed to Him alone on whom the dove descended, and of whom it was said, "This is He that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"? Peter may baptize, but this is He that baptizeth; Paul may baptize, yet this is He that baptizeth; Judas may baptize, still this is He that baptizeth.

For if the sanctity of baptism be according to the diversity of merits in them that administer it, then as merits are diverse there will be diverse baptisms; and the recipient will imagine that what he receives is so much the better, the better he appears to be from whom he received it. The saints themselves-understand brethren, they that belong to the dove, that have their part in that city of Jerusalem, the good themselves in the Church, of whom the apostle says, "The Lord knoweth them that are His"-are endued with different graces, and do not all possess like merits. Some are more holy than others, some are better than others. Therefore if one receive baptism from him, for example, who is a righteous saint, another from another who is of inferior merit with God, of inferior degree, of inferior continence, of inferior life, how notwithstanding is that which they receive one, equal and like, if it be not because, "This is He that baptizeth"? Just, then, as when the good and the better administer baptism, one man does not receive a good thing, another a better; but, notwithstanding that the ministers were one good the other better, they receive what is one and equal, not a better in the one case and a worse in the other; so, too, when a bad man administers baptism, through the ignorance or forbearance of the Church (for bad men either are not known as such, or are borne with; the chaff is tolerated until the floor be fully purged at the last), that which is given is one, not unlike because the ministers are unlike, but like and equal because "This is He that baptizeth."

The dove teaches us. From the head of the Lord she answers, and says, Thou hast baptism, but the charity with which I groan thou hast not. How is this says he, I have baptism, and have not charity? Have I the sacraments, and not charity? Do not shout: show me how can he who divides unity have charity? I, saith he, have baptism. Thou hast; but that baptism, without charity, profits thee nothing; because without charity thou art nothing. The baptism itself, even in him who is nothing, is not nothing. Baptism, indeed, is something, aye, something great, for His sake, of whom it is said, "This is He that baptizeth." But lest thou shouldst fancy that that which is great can profit thee aught, if thou be not in unity, it was after He was baptized that the dove descended, as if intimating, If thou hast baptism, be in the dove, lest what thou hast profit thee not. Come, then, to the dove, we say; not that thou mayest begin to have what thou hadst not before, but that what thou didst have may begin to profit thee. For thou didst have baptism to destruction without; if thou shalt have it within, it begins to profit thee to salvation.

For not only was baptism not profitable to thee, and not also hurtful. Even holy things may be hurtful. In the good, indeed, holy things are to salvation; in the evil, to judgment. For we certainly know, brethren, what we receive, and what we receive is at any rate holy, and no one says that it is not: and what says the apostle? "But he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself." He does not say that the thing itself is bad, but that the evil man, by receiving it amiss, receives the good thing which he does receive to judgment. Was that morsel which the Lord delivered to Judas evil? God forbid. The physician would not give poison; it was health the physician gave; but by unworthily receiving it, he who received it not being at peace, received it unto destruction. So likewise also good heed to what thou hast: by that very thing which thou hast thou wilt be condemned. Wherefore? Because thou hast what belongs to the dove apart from the dove. If thou hast what is the dove's in the dove, thou art safe. Suppose thyself a soldier: if thou hast thy general's mark within the lines, thou servest in safety; but if thou hast it out of bounds, not only that mark will not be of advantage to thee for service, but thou wilt even be punished as a deserter. Come, then, come, and do not say, I have already, I have enough. Come; the dove is calling thee, calling thee by her sighing.

My brethren, this question if solved today would oppress you, I do not doubt, for already have I spoken many words. But know that the question is of such a character that alone it is able to extinguish the party of Donatus. I have said thus much, my beloved, in order to gain your attention, as is my wont; and also in order that you may pray for us, that the Lord may grant to us to speak what is suitable, and that you may be found worthy to receive what is suitable. In the meantime, be pleased to defer the question for to-day. But in the meantime, I say this briefly, until I give a fuller solution: Inquire peacefully, without quarreling, without contention, without altercations, without enmities; both seek by yourselves, and inquire of others, and say, "This question our bishop proposed to us to-day, and he will resolve it at a future time, if the Lord will." But whether it be resolved or not, reckon that I have propounded what appears to me of importance; for it does seem of considerable importance. John says, "I have need to be baptized of Thee," as if he knew Christ. For if he did not know Him by whom he wished to be baptized, he spoke rashly when he said, "I have need to be baptized of Thee." Therefore he knew Him. If he knew Him, what is the meaning of the saying, "I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him, as a dove, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"? What shall we say? That we do not know when the dove came? Lest perchance they take refuge in this, let the other evangelists be read, who have spoken of this matter more plainly, and we find most evidently that the dove then descended when the Lord came up out of the water. Upon Him baptized the heavens opened, and He saw the Spirit descending. If it was when He was already baptized that John knew Him, how saith he to Him, coming to baptism, "I have need to be baptized of Thee"? Ponder this in the meantime with yourselves, confer upon it, treat of it, one with another. The Lord our God grant that before you hear it from me, the explanation may be revealed to some of you first. Nevertheless, brethren, know this, that by means of the solution of this question, the allegation of the party of Donatus, if they have any sense of shame, will be silenced, and their mouths will be shut regarding the grace of baptism, a matter about which they raise mists to confuse the uninstructed, and spread nets for flying birds.

Who then sent John? If we say the Father, we speak truly; if we say the Son, we speak truly; but to speak more plainly, we say the Father and the Son. But whom the Father and the Son sent, one God sent; because the Son said, "I and the Father are one." How, then, did he not know Him by whom he was sent? For he said, "I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me." I interrogate John: "Who sent thee to baptize with water? what did He say to thee?" "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." Is it this, O John, that He said to thee who sent thee? It is manifest that it was this; who, then, sent thee? Perhaps the Father. True God is the Father, and the Truth is God the Son: if the Father without the Son sent thee, God without the Truth sent thee; but if thou art true, because thou dost speak the truth, and dost speak of the Truth, the Father did not send thee without the Son, but the Father and the Son together sent thee.

Did John hear this that he might know Him whom he had not known, or that he might more fully know Him whom he had already known? For if he had been entirely ignorant of Him, he would not have said to Him when He came to the river to be baptized, "I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?" He knew Him therefore. But when did the dove descend? When the Lord had been baptized, and was ascending from the water. But if He who sent Him said, "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost," and he knew Him not, but when the dove descended he learned to know Him, and the time at which the dove descended was when the Lord was going up from the water; but John had known the Lord, when the Lord came to him to the water: it is made plain to us that John after a manner knew, and after a manner did not at first know the Lord. And unless we understand it so, he was a liar. How was he true acknowledging the Lord and saying, "Comest Thou to me to be baptized," and, "I have need to be baptized of Thee"? Is he true when he said this? And how is he again true when he saith, "I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He who baptizeth with the Holy Ghost"? The Lord was made known by a dove, not to him who knew Him not, but to him who in a manner knew Him, and in a manner knew Him not. It is for us to discover what, in Him, John did not know, and learned by the dove.

Since, then, John had accepted a baptism which may be properly called the baptism of John, but the Lord Jesus Christ would not give His baptism to any, not that no one should be baptized with the baptism of the Lord, but that the Lord Himself should always baptize: that was done, that the Lord should baptize by means of servants; that is to say, those whom the servants of the Lord were to baptize, the Lord baptized, not they. For it is one thing to baptize in the capacity of a servant, another thing to baptize with power. For baptism derives its character from Him through whose power it is given; not from him through whose ministry it is given. As was John, so was his baptism: the righteous baptism of a righteous man; but of a man who had received from the Lord that grace, and so great grace, that he was worthy to be the forerunner of the Judge, and to point Him out with the finger, and to fulfill the saying of that prophecy: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way for the Lord." As was the Lord, such was His baptism: the baptism of the Lord, then, was divine, because the Lord was God.

But the Lord Jesus Christ could, if He wished, have given power to one of His servants to give a baptism of his own, as it were, in His stead, and have transferred from Himself the power of baptizing, and assigned it to one of His servants, and have given the same power to the baptism transferred to the servant as it had when bestowed by the Lord. This He would not do, in order that the hope of the baptized might be in him by whom they acknowledged themselves to have been baptized. He would not, therefore, that the servant should place his hope in the servant. And therefore the apostle exclaimed, when he saw men wishing to place their hope in himself, "Was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" Paul then baptized as a servant, not as the power itself; but the Lord baptized as the power. Give heed. He was both able to give this power to His servants, and unwilling. For if He had given this power to His servants--that is to say, that what belonged to the Lord should be theirs--there would have been as many baptisms as servants; so that, as we speak of the baptism of John, we should also have spoken of the baptism of Peter, the baptism of Paul, the baptism of James, the baptism of Thomas, of Matthew, of Bartholomew: for we spoke of that baptism as that of John.

Therefore, lest as many baptisms should be spoken of as there are servants who received power from the Lord to baptize, the Lord kept to Himself the power of baptizing, and gave to His servants the ministry. The servant says that he baptizes; he says so rightly, as the apostle says, "And I baptized also the household of Stephanas;" but as a servant. Therefore, if even he be bad, and he happen to have the ministration of baptism, and if men do not know him, but God knows him, God, who has kept the power to Himself, permits baptism to be administered through him.

But this John did not know in the Lord. That He was the Lord he knew, and that he ought to be baptized by Him he knew; and he confessed that He was the Truth, and that he, the true man, was sent by the Truth: this he knew. But what was in Him which he knew not? That he was about to retain to Himself the power of His baptism, and was not to transmit or transfer it to any servant; but that, whether a good servant baptized in a ministerial manner, or whether an evil servant baptized, the person baptized should not know that he was baptized, unless by Him who kept to Himself the power of baptizing. And that you may know, brethren, what John did not know in Him, he learned it by means of the dove: for he knew the Lord; but that He was to retain to Himself the power of baptizing, and not to give it to any servant, he did not yet know. Regarding this he said, "I knew Him not." And that you may know that he there learnt this, give heed to what follows: "But He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He." What same is He? The Lord? But he already knew the Lord. Suppose, then, that John had said thus far, "I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me--" We ask, what He said? It follows: "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him." I do not say what follows. In the meantime give heed: "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He." But what same is He? What did He who sent me mean to teach me by means of a dove? That He was Himself the Lord. Already I knew by whom I was sent; already I knew Him to whom I said, "Comest Thou to me to be baptized? I have need to be baptized of Thee." So far, then, did I know the Lord, that I wished to be baptized by Him, not that He should be baptized by me.

Already, then, John knew this, and he knew the Lord. What then did the dove teach? What did He desire to teach by means of the dove--that is, by means of the Holy Spirit thus coming to teach who had sent him to whom He said, "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He"? Who is this He? The Lord? I know. But didst thou already know this, that the same Lord having the power to baptize, was not to give that power to any servant, but to retain it to Himself, so that all who were baptized by the ministration of the servant, should not impute their baptism to the servant, but to the Lord? Didst thou already know this? I did not know this: so what did He say to me? "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding upon Him, the same is He who baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." He does not say, "He is the Lord;" He does not say, "He is the Christ;" He does not say, "He is God;" He does not say, "He is Jesus;" He does not say, "He is the One who was born of the Virgin Mary, after thee, before thee." This He does not say, for this John did already know. But what did he not know? That this great authority of baptism the Lord Himself was to have, and to retain to Himself, whether present in the earth or absent in body in the heaven, and present in majesty; lest Paul should say, my baptism; lest Peter should say, my baptism. Therefore see, give heed to the words of the apostles. None of the apostles said, my baptism. Although there was one gospel of all, yet thou findest that they said, my gospel: thou dost not find that they say, my baptism.

This, then, my brethren, John learned. What John learned by means of the dove let us also learn. For the dove did not teach John without teaching the Church, the Church to which it was said, "My dove is one." Let the dove teach the dove; let the dove know what John learned by the dove. The Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove. But this which John learned in the dove, wherefore did he learn it in the dove? For it behoved him to learn, and perhaps it did not so much behove him to learn as to learn by the dove.

John learns to know Him whom he knew; but he learns in Him with regard to what he did not know; with regard to what he did know, he does not learn. And what did he know? The Lord. What did he not know? That the power of the Lord's baptism was not to pass from the Lord to any man, but that the ministration of it plainly would do so; the power from the Lord to no one, the ministration both to good and bad. Let not the dove shrink from the ministration of the bad, but have regard to the power of the Lord. What injury does a bad servant do to you where the Lord is good? What impediment can the malicious herald put in your way if the judge is well-disposed? John learned by means of the dove this. What is it that he learned? Let him repeat it himself. "The same said unto me," saith he, "Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending as a dove, and abiding on Him, this is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." Let not those seducers deceive thee, O dove, who say, We baptize. Acknowledge, dove, what the dove has taught: "This is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." By means of the dove we are taught that this is He; and dost thou think that thou art baptized by his authority by whose ministration thou art baptized? If thou thinkest this, thou art not as yet in the body of the dove; and if thou art not in the body of the dove, it is not to be wondered at that thou hast not simplicity; for by means of the dove, simplicity is chiefly designated.

Wherefore, my brethren, by the simplicity of the dove did John learn that "This is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost," unless to show that these are not doves who have scattered the Church? Hawks they were, and kites. The dove does not tear.

As yet, in the darkness of this life, we walk by the lamp of faith: let us hold also to the lamp John, and let us confound by him the enemies of Christ; indeed, let Christ Himself confound His own enemies by His own lamp. Let us put the question which the Lord put to the Jews, let us ask and say, "The baptism of John, whence is it? from heaven, or of men?" What will they say? Mark, if they are not as enemies confounded by the lamp. What will they say? If they shall say, Of men, even their own will stone them; but if they shall say, From heaven, let us say to them, Wherefore, then, did ye not believe him? They perhaps say, We believe him. Wherefore, then, do you say that you baptize, when John says, "This is He which baptizeth"? But it behoveth, they say, the ministers of so great a Judge who baptize, to be righteous. And I also say, and all say, that it behoveth the ministers of so great a Judge to be righteous; let the ministers, by all means, be righteous if they will; but if they will not be righteous who sit in the seat of Moses, my Master made me safe, of whom His Spirit said, "This is He which baptizeth."

If the minister is righteous, I reckon him with Paul, I reckon him with Peter; with those I reckon righteous ministers: because, in truth, righteous ministers seek not their own glory; for they are ministers, they do not wish to be thought judges, they abhor that one should place his hope on them; therefore, I reckon the righteous minister with Paul. For what does Paul say? "I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. Neither is he that planteth anything, nor he that watereth; but God who giveth the increase." But he who is a proud minister is reckoned with the devil; but the gift of Christ is not contaminated, which flows through him pure, which passes through him liquid, and comes to the fertile earth. Suppose that he is stony, that he cannot from water rear fruit; even through the stony channel the water passes, the water passes to the garden beds; in the stony channel it causes nothing to grow, but nevertheless it brings much fruit to the gardens. For the spiritual virtue of the sacrament is like the light: both by those who are to be enlightened is it received pure, and if it passes through the impure it is not stained. Let the ministers be by all means righteous, and seek not their own glory, but His glory whose ministers they are; let them not say, The baptism is mine; for it is not theirs. Let them give heed unto John. Behold, John was full of the Holy Spirit; and he had his baptism from heaven, not from men; but how long had he it? He said himself, "Prepare ye the way for the Lord." But when the Lord was known, Himself became the way; there was no longer need for the baptism of John to prepare the way for the Lord.

What, however, are they accustomed to say against us? "Behold, after John, baptism was given." For before that question was properly treated in the Catholic Church, many erred in it, both great and good men; but because they were members of the dove, they did not cut themselves off, and in their case that happened which the apostle said, "If in any thing ye are otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you." Whence those who separated themselves became unteachable. What then are they wont to say? Behold, after John baptism was given; after heretical baptism is it not to be given because certain who had the baptism of John were commanded by Paul to be baptized, for they had not the baptism of Christ. Why then, say they, dost thou exaggerate the merit of John, and, as it were, underrate the misery of heretics? I also grant to you that the heretics are wicked; but the heretics gave the baptism of Christ, which baptism John did not give.

I go back to John, and say, "This is He which baptizeth." For John is better than a heretic, just as John is better than a drunkard, as John is better than a murderer. If we ought to baptize after the worse because the apostles baptized after the better, whosoever among them were baptized by a drunkard,--I do not say by a murderer, I do not say by the satellite of some wicked man, I do not say by the robber of other men's goods, I do not say by the oppressor of orphans, or a separater of married persons; I speak of none of these; I speak of what happens every year, of what happens every day; I speak of what all are called to, even in this city, when it is said to them, Let us play the part of the irrational, let us have pleasure, and on such a day as this of the calends of January we ought not to fast: these are the things I speak of, these trifling everyday proceedings;--when one is baptized by a drunkard, who is better? John or the drunkard? Reply, if thou canst, that the drunkard is better than John! This thou wilt never venture to do. Do you then, as a sober man, baptize after thy drunkard. For if the apostles baptized after John, how much more ought the sober to baptize after the drunkard? Or dost thou say, the drunkard is in unity with me? Was not John then, the friend of the Bridegroom, in unity with the Bridegroom?

But I say to thee thyself, whoever thou art, Art thou better than John? Thou wilt not venture to say: I am better than John. Then let thine own baptize after thee if they are better. For if baptism was administered after John, blush that baptism is not administered after thee. Thou wilt say, But I have and teach the baptism of Christ. Acknowledge, then, now the Judge, and do not be a proud herald. Thou givest the baptism of Christ, therefore baptism is not administered after thee: after John it was administered, because he gave not the baptism of Christ, but his own; for he had in such manner received it that it was his own. Thou art then not better than John: but the baptism given through thee is better than that of John; for the one is Christ's, but the other is that of John. And that which was given by Paul, and that which was given by Peter, is Christ's; and if baptism was given by Judas it was Christ's. Judas gave baptism and after Judas baptism was not repeated; John gave baptism, and baptism was repeated after John: because if baptism was given by Judas, it was the baptism of Christ; but that which was given by John, was John's baptism. We prefer not Judas to John; but the baptism of Christ, even when given by the hand of Judas, we prefer to the baptism of John, rightly given even by the hand of John.

For it was said of the Lord before He suffered, that He baptized more than John; then it was added: "Howbeit, Jesus Himself baptized not, but His disciples." He, and not He: He by power, they by ministry; they performed the service of baptizing, the power of baptizing remained in Christ. His disciples, then, baptized, and Judas was still among his disciples: and were those, then, whom Judas baptized not again baptized; and those whom John baptized were they again baptized? Plainly there was a repetition, but not a repetition of the same baptism. For those whom John baptized, John baptized; those whom Judas baptized, Christ baptized. In like manner, then, they whom a drunkard baptized, those whom a murderer baptized, those whom an adulterer baptized, if it was the baptism of Christ, were baptized by Christ. I do not fear the adulterer, the drunkard, or the murderer, because I give heed unto the dove, through whom it is said to me, "This is He which baptizeth."

But, my brethren, it is madness to say that--I will not say Judas--but that any man was better than he of whom it was said, that "Among those that are born of women, there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist." No servant then is preferred to him; but the baptism of the Lord, even when given through an evil servant, is preferred to the baptism even of a servant who was a friend. Listen to the sort of persons whom the Apostle Paul mentions, false brethren, preaching the word of God through envy, and what he says of them: "And I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." They proclaimed Christ, through envy indeed, but still they proclaimed Christ. Consider not the why, but the whom: through envy is Christ preached to thee. Behold Christ, avoid envy. Do not imitate the evil preacher, but imitate the Good One who is preached to thee. Christ then was preached by some out of envy. And what is envy? A shocking evil. By this evil was the devil cast down; this malignant pest it was which cast him down; and certain preachers of Christ were possessed by it, whom, nevertheless, the apostle permitted to preach. Wherefore? Because they preached Christ. But he who envies, hates; and he who hates, what is said concerning him? Listen to the Apostle John: "He who hateth his brother is a murderer." Behold, after John baptism was given, after a murderer baptism was not given; because John gave his own baptism, the murderer gave the baptism of Christ. That sacrament is so sacred that not even the ministration of a murderer pollutes it.

I do not reject John, but rather I believe John. In what do I believe John? In that which he learned through the dove? What did he learn through the dove? "This is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." Now therefore, brethren, hold this fast and impress it upon your hearts; for if I would more fully explain to-day, Wherefore through the dove, time fails. For I have, I think, to some extent made plain to you, holy brethren, that a matter which had to be learned was instilled into John by means of the dove, a matter with regard to Christ which John did not know, although he already knew Christ; but why it behoved this matter to be pointed out by means of the dove, I would say, were it possible to say it briefly: but because it would take long to say, and I am unwilling to burden you, since I have been helped by your prayers to perform my promise; with the renewed help of your pious attention and good wishes, it will likewise become clear to you, wherefore John with regard to that matter which he learned regarding the Lord, namely, that it is "He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost," and that to none of His servants had he transferred the power of baptizing--why this it became him not to learn except through the dove.

Christ was such a Center in His incarnation. Hence, it is written in John: "In the midst of you there has stood One whom you do not know." And later: "He who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He upon whom thou wilt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him, He it is who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'"

"And I knew him not" before, but by this sign I knew him, because it was given to me by God; therefore he adds: "But he who sent me to baptize in water," namely God; above, in the same chapter: "There was a man sent from God." "He," I say, "said to me: Upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending and remaining upon him, he it is who baptizes in the Holy Spirit," because baptism is given in his name alone and by his power: Acts 2: "Let each one of you be baptized in the name of Christ." The sign of this was the descent and abiding of the Holy Spirit; whence Bede: "In the Mediator alone the Spirit remained perpetually; because from that time when he began to become man, he was conceived by his ministry and operation." Therefore by this sign he was certified.

This Holy Spirit came down when the Lord was baptized so that the dignity of him who was baptized might not be hidden.… The heavens too were opened because of the dignity of him who descended. For see, he says, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and lighting upon him. The Spirit descended voluntarily. For it was appropriate, as some have interpreted, that the primacy and firstfruits of the Holy Spirit promised to the baptized should be conferred upon the humanity of the Savior first since the Spirit is the giver of such grace. But perhaps he came down in the form of a dove, as some say, to exhibit a figure of that dove who is pure and innocent and undefiled—who also helps the prayers of the children she has begotten and who brings forgiveness of sins. It was emblematically foretold that Christ should be made known in this way in the appearance of his eyes. For in the Song of Songs she cries concerning the Bridegroom, and says, "Your eyes are as doves by the rivers of water."69The dove of Noah, according to some, was in part a figure of this dove. In the time of Noah, salvation came to them by means of wood and water along with the beginning of a whole new generation. And, the dove returned to him towards evening with an olive branch. Just as this happened, they say, so the Holy Spirit also descended upon the true Noah, the author of the second birth, who draws together into one the wills of all nations. The various dispositions of the animals in the ark were in fact a figure of him too—him at whose coming the spiritual wolves feed with the lambs, in whose church the calf, and the lion, and the ox, feed in the same pasture, as we behold to this day the rulers of the world guided and taught by churchmen. The spiritual dove therefore, as some interpret, came down at the season of his baptism so that he might show that it is he who by the wood of the cross saves those who believe, he who when evening comes grants salvation through his death.

But we, with but as poor a measure of understanding as of faith, are able to determine that that baptism was divine indeed, (yet in respect of the command, not in respect of efficacy too, in that we read that John was sent by the lord to perform this duty, ) but human in its nature: for it conveyed nothing celestial, but it fore-ministered to things celestial; being, to wit, appointed over repentance, which is in man's power.

He revealed why he lived in the wilderness. This certainly happened through a special providence of God, in order that he might not have any relationship with the Messiah. And John certainly would have had such a relationship if he had lived in town, since they were of the same age and they were related. The suspicion would have easily arisen that he had testified those words because of that previous relationship and because of their friendship and the fact that they were related. In order to remove this suspicion, John was segregated from adolescence onward and grew up in the wilderness. Therefore, with good reason he said, "I myself did not know him." I had no familiarity or friendship with him, but I was sent to baptize with water for him so that I might reveal him whom I did not know. He clearly showed that he baptized so that all the Jews who came because of the baptism might have an occasion to hear his doctrine and to see him to whom he testified.

He who sent me so that I might reveal before everybody that he had come—and therefore he gave me the power to baptize with water—predicted to me that the Spirit would descend on him. These words were said to the Baptist while he was in the wilderness, and immediately he who indeed did [preach and baptize] came. As the Lord then came to John, he immediately received the vision so that he might recognize the Lord. This is why he preached so publicly about his greatness. When he, while administering the baptism, saw in a spiritual vision the Spirit descending, as had been predicted to him, then he was sure that he was seeing the expected result of the prophecy.

"But He who sent me to baptize in water said to me: 'Upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, He is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'" John, deflecting, as I said, suspicion from his own testimony about Christ, traces this testimony back to God the Father. "I," he says, "did not even know Him, but the Father revealed Him to me at the baptism." "But," someone may ask, "if John did not know Him, how does the evangelist Matthew (Matt. 3:14) say that he tried to prevent Him and said, 'I need to be baptized by You'?" To this one may answer that the words "did not know Him" should be understood to mean that long beforehand and before the baptism, John did not know Him, but then, at the time of the baptism, he recognized Him. Or one may answer differently: although John knew about Jesus, that He was the Christ, that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit he learned only then, when he saw the Spirit descending upon Him. So, by the words "I did not know Him," John gives us to understand that although he did not know that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit, he did know that He was superior to many. That is why, knowing surely that He was greater than all, John, according to the evangelist Matthew, tried to prevent Him. But when the Spirit descended, he came to know Him even more clearly and proclaimed Him to the rest. And the Spirit appeared to all those present, and not to John only. "Why then," someone will say, "did they not believe?" Because their foolish heart was darkened so that, even seeing Him working miracles, they did not believe. Some, however, say that not all saw the Spirit, but only the most devout. For although the Spirit descended in a sensible form, it was fitting for Him to appear not to all, but to the worthy, since the prophets too, for example Daniel and Ezekiel, although they saw many things in sensible form, yet no one else saw those things.

274 Then when he says, I did not know him, he teaches us how this vision should be understood. For certain heretics, as the Ebionites, said that Christ was neither the Christ nor the Son of God from the time he was born, but only began to be the Son of God and the Christ when he was anointed with the oil of the Holy Spirit at his baptism. But this is false, because at the very hour of his birth the angel said to the shepherds: "This day a Savior has been born for you in the city of David, Christ the Lord" (Lk 2:11). Therefore, so that we do not believe that the Holy Spirit descended upon Christ in his baptism as though Christ needed to receive the Spirit anew for his sanctification, the Baptist gives the reason for the Spirit's coming down. He says that the Spirit descended not for the benefit of Christ, but for our benefit, that is, so that the grace of Christ might be made known to us. And so he says, And I did not know him! And yet it was to reveal him to Israel that I came baptizing with water.

275 There is a problem here. For he says, he who sent me to baptize. If he is saying that the Father sent him, it is true. Also, if he is saying that the Son sent him, it is even more clear, since it is said that both the Father and the Son sent him, because John is not one of those referred to in Jeremiah (23:21), "I did not send the prophets, yet they ran." But if the Son did send him, how can he then say, I did not know him? If it is said that although he knew Christ according to his divinity, yet he did not know him according to his humanity until after he saw the Spirit coming down upon him, one might counter that the Holy Spirit descended upon Christ when he was being baptized, and John had already known Christ before he was baptized, otherwise he would not have said: "I ought to be baptized by you, and you come to me?" (Mt 3:14).

So we must say that this problem can be resolved in three ways. In one way, according to Chrysostom, so that the meaning is to know familiarly; the sense being that I did not know him, i.e., in a familiar way. And if the objection is raised that John says, "I ought to be baptized by you," it can be answered that two different times are being discussed: so that I did not know him, refers to a time long before baptism, when he was not yet familiar with Christ: but when he says, "I ought to be baptized by you," he is referring to the time when Christ was being baptized, when he was now familiar with Christ because of his frequent visits. In another way, according to Jerome, it could be said that Christ was the Son of God and the Savior of the world, and that John did in fact know this; but it was not through the baptism that he knew that he was the Savior of the world. And so to remedy this ignorance he adds, he is the one who is to baptize with the Holy Spirit. But it is better to say with Augustine that John knew certain things and was ignorant of others. Explaining what he did not know, he adds that the power of baptizing, which Christ could have shared with his faithful followers, would be reserved for himself alone. And this is what he says, he who sent me to baptize with water... is the one, exclusively and solely, who is to baptize with the Holy Spirit, i.e., he and no one else, because this power he reserved for himself alone.

276 We should note that a threefold power of Christ is found in baptism. One is the power of efficiency, by which he interiorly cleanses the soul from the stain of sin. Christ has this power as God, but not as man, and it cannot be communicated to any other. Another is the power of ministry, which he does share with the faithful: "Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Mt 28:19). Therefore priests have the power to baptize as ministers. Christ too, as man, is called a minister, as the Apostle says. But he is also the head of all the ministers of the Church.

Because of this he alone has the power of excellence in the sacraments. And this excellence shows itself in four things. First, in the institution of the sacraments, because no mere man or even the entire Church could institute sacraments, or change the sacraments, or dispense with the sacraments. For by their institution the sacraments give invisible grace, which only God can give. Therefore, only one who is true God can institute sacraments. The second lies in the efficacy of Christ's merits, for the sacraments have their power from the merit of Christ's passion: "All of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus, have been baptized into his death" (Rom 6:3). The third is that Christ can confer the effect of baptism without the sacrament; and this is peculiar to Christ. Fourthly, because at one time baptism was conferred in the name of Christ, although this is no longer done.

Now he did not communicate these four things to anyone; although he could have communicated some of them, for example, that baptism be conferred in the name of Peter or of someone else, and perhaps one of the remaining three. But this was not done lest schisms arise in the Church by men putting their trust in those in whose name they were baptized.

And so John, in stating that the Holy Spirit came down upon Christ, teaches that it is Christ alone who baptizes interiorly by his own power.

277 One might also say that when John said, "I ought to be baptized by you," he recognized Christ through an interior revelation, but that when he saw the Holy Spirit coming down upon him, he knew him through an exterior sign. And so he mentions both of these ways of knowing. The first when he says, he who sent me to baptize with water had said to me, i.e., revealed something in an interior way. The second when he adds, The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and rest is the one who is to baptize with the Holy Spirit.

John bare record because he saw. What record did he bear? "That this is the Son of God." It behoved, then, that He should baptize who is God's only Son, not His adopted son. Adopted sons are the ministers of the only Son: the only Son has power; the adopted, the ministry. In the case that a minister baptizes who does not belong to the number of sons, because he lives evilly and acts evilly, what is our consolation? "This is He which baptizeth."

"And I saw" and bore witness that this is the Son of God. Here the certain testimony is touched upon. For the testimony is certain when a man testifies concerning what he has seen. Therefore he says: "And I saw and bore witness that this is the Son of God": below, chapter 19: "And he who saw bore witness, and his testimony is true."

And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

Sure is the witness; who, what he hath actually seen, that he also speaketh. For haply he was not ignorant of that which is written, That which thine eyes have seen, tell. I saw then, says he, the sign, and understood That Which was signified by it. I bear record that this is the Son of God, Who was proclaimed by the Law that is through Moses, and heralded by the voice of the holy Prophets. The blessed Evangelist seems to me again to say with some great confidence, This is the Son of God, that is, the One, the Only by Nature, the Heir of the Own Nature of the Father, to Whom we too, sons by adoption, are conformed and through Whom we are called by grace to the dignity of sonship. For as from God the Father every family in Heaven and earth is named, from His being properly, and first, and truly Father, so is all sonship too from the Son, by reason of His being properly and Alone truly Son, not bastard nor falsely-called, but of the Essence of God the Father, not by off-cutting or emanation or division or severance (for the Divine Nature is altogether Impassible): but as One of One, ever Co-existing and Co-eternal and Innate in Him Who begat Him, being in Him, and coming forth from Him, Indivisible and without Dimensions; since the Divinity is neither after the manner of a body, nor bounded by space, nor of nature such as to make progressive footsteps. But like as from fire proceedeth the heat that is in it, appearing to be separate from it in idea, and to be other than it, though it is of it and in it by nature, and proceedeth from it without suffering any harm in the way of offcutting, division, or emanation (for it is preserved whole in the whole fire): so shall we conceive of the Divine Offspring too, thinking thereon in a manner most worthy of God, and believing that the Son subsists of Himself, yet not excluding Him from the One Ineffable Godhead, nor saying that He is Other in substance than the Father. For then would He no longer be rightly conceived of as Son, but something other than He, and a new god would arise, other than He That Only Is. For how shall not that which is not consubstantial with God by Nature, wholly fall away from being Very God? But since the blessed Baptist is both trustworthy, and of the greatest repute, and testifieth that This is the Son of God: we will confess the Son to be altogether Very God, and of the Essence of the Father. For this and nothing else, does the name of Sonship signify to us.

A confident witness is one who not only sees but actually speaks about what he has seen. [John] surely was not ignorant of what was written, "Tell what your eyes have seen." "I saw" then, he says, the sign, and I understood what was signified by it. I bear witness "that this is the Son of God," who was proclaimed by the law through Moses and heralded by the voice of the holy prophets. The blessed Evangelist seems to me again to say with supreme confidence, "This is the Son of God," that is, the one and only one who is by nature the unique heir of the Father to whom we too, sons by adoption, are conformed and through whom we are called by grace to the dignity of sonship.

"And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God."

Where did he "bear record that this is the Son of God?" he called Him indeed "Lamb," and said that He should "baptize with the Spirit," but nowhere did he say of Him, "Son of God." But the other Evangelists do not write that He said anything after the baptism, but having been silent as to the time intervening, they mention the miracles of Christ which were done after John's captivity, whence we may reasonably conjecture that these and many others are omitted. And this our Evangelist himself has declared, at the end of his narrative. For they were so far from inventing anything great concerning Him, that the things which seem to bring reproach, these they have all with one voice and with all exactness set down, and you will not find one of them omitting one of such circumstances; but of the miracles, part some have left for the others to relate, part all have passed over in silence.

Where then did John testify about Jesus that He is the Son of God? This is nowhere written. He calls Him the Lamb, but nowhere the Son of God. From this it is natural to suppose that very much else was also left unrecorded by the apostles, for not everything was written down.

278 Then he shows what the Baptist understood from this vision, that is, that Christ is the Son of God. And this is what he says, Now I have seen for myself, that is, the Spirit coming down on him, and have given testimony that he, that is, Christ, is the Son of God, that is, the true and natural Son. For there were adopted sons of the Father who had a likeness to the natural Son of God: "Conformed to the image of his Son" (Rom 8:29). So he who baptizes in the Holy Spirit, through whom we are adopted as sons, ought to fashion sons of God. "You did not receive the spirit of slavery... but the spirit of adoption" (Rom 8:15). Therefore, because Christ is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit, the Baptist correctly concludes that he is the true and pure Son of God: "that we may be in his true Son" (1 Jn 5:20).

279 But if there were others who saw the Holy Spirit coming down upon Christ, why did they not also believe? I answer that they had not been so disposed for this. Or perhaps, this vision was seen only by the Baptist.

(de Trin. iv. 13.) Why did He offer Himself to temptation? That He might be our mediator in vanquishing temptation not by aid only, but by example.

(ap. Anselm.) This desert is that between Jerusalem and Jericho, where the robbers used to resort. It is called Hammaim, i. e. 'of blood,' from the bloodshed which these robbers caused there; hence the man was said (in the parable) to have fallen among robbers as he went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, bearing a figure of Adam, who was overcome by dæmons. It was therefore fit that the place where Christ overcame the Devil, should be the same in which the Devil in the parable overcomes man.

It is often doubted by some by what spirit Jesus was led into the desert, because of what follows: "The devil took him up into the holy city." And again: "He took him up onto a high mountain." This question is properly understood if we believe he was led into the desert by the Holy Spirit, so that his own Spirit would lead him there, where the evil spirit would then find him to tempt him. But behold, when it is said that God made man was taken up by the devil either onto a high mountain or into the holy city, the mind recoils, human ears are terrified to hear this. Yet we recognize that these things are not incredible if we consider other things that were done to him. Certainly the devil is the head of all the wicked, and all the wicked are members of this head. Was not Pilate a member of the devil? Were not the Jews who persecuted and the soldiers who crucified Christ members of the devil? What wonder is it then if he allowed himself to be led onto a mountain by him, who also allowed himself to be crucified by his members? Therefore it is not unworthy of our Redeemer that he willed to be tempted, he who had come to be killed. For it was just that he should overcome our temptations by his temptations, just as he had come to conquer our death by his death.

But we should know that temptation occurs in three ways: by suggestion, by delight, and by consent. And when we are tempted, we frequently fall into delight or even into consent, because having been propagated from the sin of the flesh, we bear within ourselves that from which we endure struggles. But God, who was incarnate in the womb of a Virgin and came into the world without sin, tolerated no contradiction within himself. Therefore he could be tempted through suggestion, but the delight of sin did not bite his mind. And so all that diabolical temptation was external, not internal.

(Hom. in. Ev. 16.1.) Some doubt what Spirit it was that led Jesus into the desert, for that it is said after, The Devil took him into the holy city. But true and without question agreeable to the context is the received opinion, that it was the Holy Spirit; that His own Spirit should lead Him thither where the evil spirit should find Him to try Him.

(ubi sup.) We should know that there are three modes of temptation; suggestion, delight, and consent; and we when we are tempted commonly fall into delight or consent, because being born of the sin of the flesh, we bear with us whence we afford strength for the contest; but God who incarnate in the Virgin's womb came into the world without sin, carried within Him nothing of a contrary nature. He could then be tempted by suggestion; but the delight of sin never gnawed His soul, and therefore all that temptation of the Devil was without not within Him.

(Hom. in. Ev. 16. 5.) The Creator of all things took no food whatever during forty days. We also, at the season of Lent as much as in us lies afflict our flesh by abstinence. The number forty is preserved, because the virtue of the decalogue is fulfilled in the books of the holy Gospel; and ten taken four times amounts to forty. Or, because in this mortal body we consist of four elements by the delights of which we go against the Lord's precepts received by the decalogue. And as we transgress the decalogue through the lusts of this flesh, it is fitting that we afflict the flesh forty-fold. Or, as by the Law we offer the tenth of our goods, so we strive to offer the tenth of our time. And from the first Sunday of Lent to the rejoicing of the paschal festival is a space of six weeks, or forty-two days, subtracting from which the six Sundays which are not kept there remain thirty-six. Now as the year consists of three hundred and sixty-five, by the affliction of these thirty-six we give the tenth of our year to God.

The journey into the desert, the forty-day fast, the hunger after the fast, the temptation by Satan and the Lord's response—all these are full of the effects of the great heavenly counsel. The fact he was led into the desert signifies the freedom of the Holy Spirit to offer his man to the devil and to permit the occasion of temptation and conquest, which the tempter would not have had unless he had been given it. There was in the devil therefore suspicious fear but no knowledge of the true identity of the One suspected. The devil was moved by the forty-day fast. He had knowledge of the poured-out waters of the abyss in just as many days and of the exploration of the promised land, in the Mosaic law written by God. He also knew that this number of years was fulfilled when the people remained in the desert with the life and condition as it were of angels. Apprehensive of that time therefore in tempting him whom he considered to be a man, he acted rashly. He had enticed Adam and by deceiving him led him to death. But it was fitting, because of his wickedness and evil deed, that he be defeated by that same humanity in whose death and misfortunes he gloried. It was the devil who envied God's gifts to humanity before the temptation of Adam, who was now unable to understand God's being present in a human being. The Lord was therefore tempted immediately after being baptized. His temptation indicates how sinister are the devil's attempts especially against those who have been sanctified, for he eagerly desires victory over the saints.Jesus did not hunger for human food but for human salvation. It was after forty days and not during forty days that he hungered. Moses and Elijah were not hungry during the same period of fasting. Therefore, when the Lord hungered, the work of abstinence did not creep up on him. His strength was not depleted by his forty days of fasting. He did not abandon his nature as a man. The devil was not to be defeated by God but by the flesh, which he surely would not have dared to tempt, except in those things which he recognized were proper human needs because of the pangs of hunger.

The Devil's snares are chiefly spread for the sanctified, because a victory over the saints is more desired than over others.

He was an hungred, not during the forty days, but after them. Therefore when the Lord hungred, it was not that the effects of abstinence then first came upon Him, but that His humanity was left to its own strength. For the Devil was to be overcome, not by the God, but by the flesh. By this was figured, that after those forty days which He was to tarry on earth after His passion were accomplished, He should hunger for the salvation of man, at which time He carried back again to God His Father the expected gift, the humanity which He had taken on Him.

(Chapter 4 - Verse 1) Then Jesus was led into the desert by the spirit. There is no doubt that it was the Holy Spirit. It follows:

In order to be tempted by the devil. However, he is led not unwillingly or captivated, but by his own will to fight.

Led, not against His will, or as a prisoner, but as by a desire for the conflict.

Then When? After the descent of the Spirit, after the voice that was borne from above, and said, "This is My Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." And what was marvellous, it was of the Holy Spirit; for this, he here saith, led Him up. For since with a view to our instruction He both did and underwent all things; He endures also to be led up thither, and to wrestle against the devil: in order that each of those who are baptized, if after his baptism he have to endure greater temptations may not be troubled as if the result were unexpected, but may continue to endure all nobly, as though it were happening in the natural course of things.

Yea, for therefore thou didst take up arms, not to be idle, but to fight. For this cause neither doth God hinder the temptations as they come on, first to teach thee that thou art become much stronger; next, that thou mayest continue modest neither be exalted even by the greatness of thy gifts, the temptations having power to repress thee; moreover, in order that that wicked demon, who is for a while doubtful about thy desertion of him, by the touchstone of temptations may be well assured that thou hast utterly forsaken and fallen from him; fourthly, that thou mayest in this way be made stronger, and better tempered than any steel; fifthly, that thou mayest obtain a clear demonstration of the treasures entrusted to thee.

For the devil would not have assailed thee, unless he had seen thee brought to greater honor. Hence, for example, from the beginning, he attacked Adam, because he saw him in the enjoyment of great dignity. For this reason he arrayed himself against Job, because he saw him crowned and proclaimed by the God of all.

How then saith He, "Pray that ye enter not into temptation." For this cause he doth not show thee Jesus simply going up, but "led up" according to the principle of the Economy; signifying obscurely by this, that we ought not of ourselves to leap upon it, but being dragged thereto, to stand manfully.

And see whither the Spirit led Him up, when He had taken Him; not into a city and forum, but into a wilderness. That is, He being minded to attract the devil, gives him a handle not only by His hunger, but also by the place. For then most especially doth the devil assail, when he sees men left alone, and by themselves. Thus did he also set upon the woman in the beginning, having caught her alone, and found her apart from her husband. Just as when he sees us with others and banded together, he is not equally confident, and makes no attack. Wherefore we have the greatest need on this very account to be flocking together continually, that we may not be open to the devil's attacks.

(Hom. xiii.) Whoever thou art then that after thy baptism sufferest grievous trials, be not troubled thereat; for this thou receivedst arms, to fight, not to sit idle. God does not hold all trial from us; first, that we may feel that we are become stronger; secondly, that we may not be puffed up by the greatness of the gifts we have received; thirdly, that the Devil may have experience that we have entirely renounced him; fourthly, that by it we may be made stronger; fifthly, that we may receive a sign of the treasure entrusted to us; for the Devil would not come upon us to tempt us, did he not see us advanced to greater honours.

The Devil is wont to be most urgent with temptation, when he sees us solitary; thus it was in the beginning he tempted the woman when he found her without the man, and now too the occasion is offered to the Devil, by the Saviour's being led into the desert.

But that you may learn how great a good is fasting, and what a mighty shield against the Devil, and that after baptism you ought to give attention to fasting and not to lusts, therefore Christ fasted, not Himself needing it, but teaching us by His example.

But He exceeded not the measure of Moses and Elias, lest it should bring into doubt the reality of His assumption of the flesh.

The Lord being baptized by John with water, is led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be baptized by the fire of temptation. 'Then,' i. e. when the voice of the Father had been given from heaven.

He was led by the Holy Spirit, not as an inferior at the bidding of a greater. For we say led, not only of him who is constrained by a stronger than he, but also of him who is induced by reasonable persuasion; as Andrew found his brother Simon, and brought him to Jesus.

The Devil comes against men to tempt them, but since He could not come against Christ, therefore Christ came against the Devil.

Not Christ only is led into the desert by the Spirit, but also all the sons of God who have the Holy Spirit. For they are not content to sit idle, but the Holy Spirit stirs them to take up some great work, i. e. to go out into the desert where they shall meet with the Devil; for there is no unrighteousness wherewith the Devil is pleased. For all good is without the flesh and the world, because it is not according to the will of the flesh and the world. To such a desert then all the sons of God go out that they may be tempted. For example if you are unmarried, the Holy Spirit has in that led you into the desert, that is, beyond the limits of the flesh and the world, that you may be tempted by lust. But he who is married is unmoved by such temptation. Let us learn that the sons of God are not tempted but when they have gone forth into the desert, but the children of the Devil whose life is in the flesh and the world are then overcome and obey; the good man, having a wife is content; the bad, though he have a wife is not therewith content, and so in all other things. The children of the Devil go not out to the Devil that they may be tempted. For what need that he should seek the strife who desires not victory? But the sons of God having more confidence and desirous of victory, go forth against him beyond the boundaries of the flesh. For this cause then Christ also went out to the Devil, that He might be tempted of him.

And to fix the measure of our quadragesimal fast, he fasted forty days and forty nights.

The Lord knew the thoughts of the Devil, that he sought to tempt Him; he had heard that Christ had been born into this world with the preaching of Angels, the witness of shepherds, the inquiry of the Magi, and the testimony of John. Thus the Lord proceeded against him, not as God, but as man, or rather both as God and man. For in forty days of fasting not to have been an hungred was not as man; to be ever an hungred was not as God. He was an hungred then that the God might not be certainly manifested, and so the hopes of the Devil in tempting Him be extinguished, and His own victory hindered.

But it is no longer open to me even to interpret the princes and powers of this world as the Creator's, since the apostle imputes ignorance to them, whereas even the devil according to our Gospel recognised Jesus in the temptation, and, according to the record which is common to both (Marcionites and ourselves) the evil spirit knew that Jesus was the Holy One of God, and that Jesus was His name, and that He was come to destroy them.

Thereupon the Lord, driven apart into desert places after baptism, showed, by maintaining a fast of forty days, that the man of God lives "not by bread alone," but "by the word of God; " and that temptations incident to fulness or immoderation of appetite are shattered by abstinence.

For since Adam met with luxury in paradise and, through deception, deteriorated to what is worse, it was necessary that [the Spirit] lead Christ into the wilderness in order to enfeeble the devil's force by someone greater in strength. So he fasted for forty nights and days.

Then was Jesus led up by the Spirit into the wilderness. Teaching us that it is especially after our baptism that we should expect temptations, He is led up by the Holy Spirit; for He did nothing apart from the Holy Spirit. He is led into the wilderness to show us that the devil tempts us when he sees us alone and without help from others. Therefore we must not put our trust in ourselves without any counsel from others. To be tempted by the devil. The devil is called "the slanderer" because he slandered God to Adam, saying, "God envies you." And even now among us the devil slanders virtue.

It was shown above that Christ prepared himself for preaching by receiving baptism, but now by overcoming temptation. In regard to this he does two things: first, the victory over temptation; secondly, the calling of disciples to hear the doctrine (v. 18).

Regarding the first he does three things: first, he mentions certain preludes to the temptation; secondly, the onslaught of the temptation (v. 3); thirdly, the victory (v. 11).

Three preludes to the temptation are mentioned, namely, the place, the fast and the experience of hunger.

In regard to the first he touches on four things: the time, the place, the leader, and the purpose of the leading.

The time, Then, i.e., when the Father's voice had announced him Son of God. In this we are given to understand that temptation is imminent for those made sons of God through baptism: "My son, if you come forward to serve the Lord, prepare yourself for temptation" (Sir 2:1). That desert was between Jerusalem and Jericho, where many were killed: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead" (Lk 10:29). And note five reasons why one is tempted after receiving spiritual grace:

First, to receive a test of his righteousness: "He that is not tempted, what sort of things does he know?" (Sir 34:10). Secondly, to repress pride: "To keep me from being too elated by the abundance of revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me" (2 Cor 12:7). Thirdly, to confound the devil, so that he would know that the virtue of Christ is so great that he cannot overcome him. An example of this is found in Job (1:8): "Have you considered my servant Job?" Fourthly, that he might become stronger, as soldiers become stronger through experience: "These are the nations which the Lord left to test Israel by them, that is, all in Israel who had no experience of any war in Canaan" (Jg 3:1). Fifthly, that he might recognize his dignity, because when the devil attacks anyone, it is an honor, because the devil attacks holy persons: "If the river is turbulent, he is not frightened; he is confident though Jordan rushes against his mouth" (Jb 40:23).

Then the place, Jesus was led up into the desert. This befits the preceding and the following, because it was fitting that after the baptism he should go into the desert. This is signified in the Israelites, who, after crossing the Red Sea, which was a figure of baptism, came into the promised land through the desert and wilderness; so the baptized should try to lead a solitary and quiet life by forsaking the world in body or in mind: "I will bring her into the wilderness and speak to her heart" (Hos 2:14); "I would lodge in the wilderness" (Ps 55:7). For it was fitting that after baptism he should go into the desert as to an individual struggle with the devil. Chrysostom: "He went into the desert, who went outside the confines (i.e., the will) of the flesh and of the world, where there is no room for temptation. For how can he be tempted by passion, who is all day with the wife?" But those who do not go out from the will of the flesh and of the devil are not sons of God but children of the devil; they have their own wife but seek another.

But the sons of God, having the Holy Spirit, are led into the desert to be tempted with Christ, of whom he continues: "He was led by the Spirit," i.e., Holy. But the one who leads is greater than the one led. Therefore, the Holy Spirit is greater than Christ. I answer that if it is referred to Jesus, in so far as he was Son of God, he is equal to the Holy Spirit. And someone can lead another either by commanding, and then he is greater, or by exhorting, and then he is equal; Andrew led Peter to Jesus; and thus was Jesus led. Hilary refers it to Christ as man, i.e., the Holy Spirit exposes to temptation the man whom he had filled. For men are led by the Holy Spirit, when they are moved by charity in such a way that they are not moved on their own initiative but by another; because they follow the impulse of charity: "The charity of God drives us" (2 Cor 5:14).

In this way the sons of God are driven by the Holy Spirit, so that they pass through the time of this life, which is full of trials; "Man's life on earth is a trial" (Jb 7:1), in victory through Christ. For he willed to be tempted, in order that, as he overcame our death by his, so he would overcome all our temptations by his: "We have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin" (Heb 4:15).

Gregory says that there are three grades of temptation: by suggestion, by taking delight, and by consent. The first is from without, and can be without sin. The second is from within, where sin begins, but it is perfected by consent. The first grade could take place in Christ, but not the other grades. Note that the devil could not have dared approach Christ to tempt him, unless Christ had first approached him.

(Lib. 83. Quest. q. 81.) Otherwise; The sum of all wisdom is to be acquainted with the Creator and the creature. The Creator is the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; the creature is partly invisible,—as the soul to which we assign a threefold nature, (as in the command to love God with the whole heart, mind, and soul,)—partly visible as the body, which we divide into four elements; the hot, the cold, the liquid, the solid. The number ten then, which stands for the whole law of life, taken four times, that is, multiplied by that number which we assign for the body, because by the body the law is obeyed or disobeyed, makes the number forty. All the aliquot parts in this number, viz. 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 20, taken together make up the number 50. Hence the time of our sorrow and affliction is fixed at forty days; the state of blessed joy which shall be hereafter is figured in the quinquagesimal festival, i. e. the fifty days from Easter to Pentecost.

(Serm. 210. 2.) Not however because Christ fasted immediately after having received baptism, are we to suppose that He established a rule to be observed, that we should fast immediately after His baptism. But when the conflict with the tempter is sore, then we ought to fast, as the body may fulfil its warfare by chastisement, and the soul obtain victory by humiliation.

But since the reading is fitting for these days—for we have heard of the forty days' abstinence of our Redeemer as we begin the season of Lent—we must discuss why this very abstinence is observed for the number of forty days. For Moses fasted twice for forty days in order to receive the law. Elijah abstained for forty days in the desert. The very Author of humanity, coming to humanity, took no food at all for forty days. Let us also, as much as we can, strive to afflict our flesh through abstinence during the annual season of Lent.

Why then is the number forty observed in abstinence, unless because the power of the Decalogue is fulfilled through the four books of the holy Gospel? For ten multiplied by four produces forty, because we fulfill the commandments of the Decalogue when we indeed keep the four books of the holy Gospel. From this another meaning can also be perceived. For in this mortal body we subsist from four elements, and through the pleasures of this same body we act contrary to the Lord's commandments. But the Lord's commandments were received through the Decalogue. Since therefore through the desires of the flesh we have despised the commandments of the Decalogue, it is fitting that we afflict that same flesh four times ten.

Although concerning this season of Lent there is still another thing that can be understood. For from the present day until the joys of the Paschal solemnity, six weeks come, whose days indeed amount to forty-two. When the six Sundays are subtracted from the abstinence, no more than thirty-six days remain in abstinence. But while the year is reckoned through three hundred and sixty-five days, and we afflict ourselves through thirty-six days, we give as it were the tithes of our year to God, so that we who have lived for ourselves through the year we received, may mortify ourselves to our Author in his tithes through abstinence.

Therefore, dearest brothers, just as you are commanded in the law to offer tithes of your possessions, so strive to offer him also tithes of your days. Let each one, as much as strength allows, mortify the flesh and afflict its desires, and slay shameful lusts, so that according to Paul's words, one may become a living sacrifice. For a sacrifice is both offered and is living when a person both does not depart from this life, and yet slays himself from carnal desires. Let the flesh that drew us joyfully to sin, bring us back afflicted to pardon. For the author of our death transgressed the precepts of life through the fruit of the forbidden tree. Let us therefore who fell from the joys of paradise through food, rise again to them as much as we can through abstinence.

Having then found Him in the wilderness, and in a pathless wilderness (for that the wilderness was such, Mark hath declared, saying, that He "was with the wild beasts"), behold with how much craft he draws near, and wickedness; and for what sort of opportunity he watches. For not in his fast, but in his hunger he approaches Him; to instruct thee how great a good fasting is, and how it is a most powerful shield against the devil, and that after the font, men should give themselves up, not to luxury and drunkenness, and a full table, but to fasting. For, for this cause even He fasted, not as needing it Himself, but to instruct us. Thus, since our sins before the font were brought in by serving the belly: much as if any one who had made a sick man whole were to forbid his doing those things, from which the distemper arose; so we see here likewise that He Himself after the font brought in fasting. For indeed both Adam by the incontinence of the belly was cast out of paradise; and the flood in Noah's time, this produced; and this brought down the thunders on Sodom. For although there was also a charge of whoredom, nevertheless from this grew the root of each of those punishments; which Ezekiel also signified when he said, "But this was the iniquity of Sodom, that she waxed wanton in pride and in fullness of bread, and in abundance of luxury." Thus the Jews also perpetrated the greatest wickedness, being driven upon transgression by their drunkenness and delicacy.

On this account then even He too fasts forty days, pointing out to us the medicines of our salvation; yet proceeds no further, lest on the other hand, through the exceeding greatness of the miracle the truth of His Economy should be discredited. For as it is, this cannot be, seeing that both Moses and Elias, anticipating Him, could advance to so great a length of time, strengthened by the power of God. And if He had proceeded farther, from this among other things His assumption of our flesh would have seemed incredible to many.

Having then fasted forty days and as many nights, "He was afterwards an hungered;" affording him a point to lay hold of and approach, that by actual conflict He might show how to prevail and be victorious. Just so do wrestlets also: when teaching their pupils how to prevail and overcome, they voluntarily in the lists engage with others, to afford these in the persons of their antagonists the means of seeing and learning the mode of conquest. Which same thing then also took place. For it being His will to draw him on so far, He both made His hunger known to him, and awaited his approach, and as He waited for him, so He dashed him to earth, once, twice, and three times, with such ease as became Him.

For the number "forty days" is composed of four groups of ten. This may be akin to the four aspects of physical reality, because the sensible world is formed out of four elements. Or it may be because a human being is formed in forty days in the womb. And so that he might not, by fasting any longer than this, give anyone the notion that he had not taken on flesh in truth, he afterward was hungry, sharing all that we have "except for sin" and participating in our condition through his own suffering.

So you see, my friends, the fact that we fast during Lent is not of human invention. The authority is divine and mystical and not taken for granted. Nor is it based on an earthly custom but on heavenly secrets. Lent [Quadragesima] contains the four-sided teaching of four decades of faith, because perfection is always four-sided. The number forty [quadragesimus] and the number ten [denarius], which hold sacraments both in heaven and on earth because a square is not free to open, are used to explain the undertaking of the Lord's fast.

When Christ "hungered," as it is written, then the devil made his move to tempt him; for he was not wholly amazed at the fact of his fasting for forty days, since he knew that Elijah had fasted for the same length of time. For this reason he took courage to attack him, thinking him to be a person of this kind, and not God.

And when He had fasted. He fasted to show us that fasting is a great weapon against temptations, just as the love of delicacies was the beginning of all sin. Forty days and forty nights. He fasts as long as Moses and Elijah did, for if He had fasted longer, it would have seemed that He had taken flesh in appearance only. Afterwards He hungered. He hungered only when He permitted His nature to do so, to give the devil an opportunity through hunger to approach Him and engage Him in combat, so that Christ could throw him down and vanquish him and grant us the victory.

Then the second prelude is given, namely, the fast. And when he had fasted..., which suits both the past and the future: the past, because it is fitting for one to fast after baptism, since he should not take his ease after baptism but should exercise himself in good works: "You were called to freedom, brethren" (Gal 5:13); but through freedom he should not be dedicated to a carnal life. It also befits the future, so that one whom the devil is about to tempt should fast, because "this kind of devil is not cast out save by prayer and fasting" (Mt 17:20). Forty days. This is to be taken literally. He adds and forty nights, so that no one suppose that it would be lawful to eat at night, as the Saracens do.

It should be noted that this number is prefigured in the Old Testament in Moses and Elijah (Ex 24:18 and 1 Kg 19:8). And a mystery is concealed in this, because such a number arises from ten multiplied by four. Ten signifies the Law, because the whole Law is contained in ten commands. Four signifies the composition of the flesh, because flesh is composed of four elements. Therefore, because we transgress the divine law through the influence of the flesh, it is proper that we afflict our flesh for forty days. According to Gregory, however, this number was established by the Church for fasting, and by it we pay the tenths of the whole year; for from the first Sunday to Easter are thirty-six days of fast; and this is one-tenth of the year with six days left over. And therefore from early times another half-day was added by those who fasted until midnight of Holy Saturday.

The third prelude is added, because afterward he was hungry. This is not recorded of Moses and Elijah, who were men; but Christ willed to be hungry to prove that he was human; otherwise, the devil would not have dared to come near to tempt him: "Being born in the likeness of men, and being found in human form" (Phil 2:7).

(in Luc. c. iv. 3.) He begins with that which had once been the means of his victory, the palate; If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones become loaves. What means such a beginning as this, but that he knew that the Son of God was to come, yet believed not that He was come on account of His fleshly infirmity. His speech is in part that of an enquirer, in part that of a tempter; he professes to believe Him God, he strives to deceive Him as man.

Every year God makes a little corn into much corn: the seed is sown and there is an increase, and men, according to the fashion of their age, say "It is Ceres, it is Adonis, it is the Corn King," or else "It is the Laws of Nature." The close-up, the translation, of this annual wonder is the feeding of the five thousand. Bread is not made there of nothing. Bread is not made of stones, as the Devil once suggested to our Lord in vain. A little bread is made into much bread. The Son will do nothing but what He sees the Father do. There is, so to speak, a family style.

The devil provokes that he might tempt him, and the Lord follows up that he might win. The battle over this temptation is thus engaged, as the devil says to the Lord, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread." Unaware of the mystery of the divine dispensation, he frames as a question what he does not know. With the voice of a doubter, he interrogates Christ and says, "If you are the Son of God …" Now let us see why he inquires when he doubts and why he questions when he does not know. He heard that it had been announced by the angel to the Virgin that she would give birth to the Son of God. He saw the magi, who had left behind the error of their limited knowledge, in humble adoration of the Child that was born. He saw, after the baptism, the Holy Spirit descending like a dove. He also heard the Father's voice from heaven saying, "This is my Son." He heard John with a loud voice proclaiming, "This is he who takes away the sin of the world." Disturbed by so much testimony therefore and now troubled by this voice, this is what he feared most of all: that after he had filled the world with sins, he heard there would now come someone to take away the sins of the world. He was frightened indeed by all these utterances, but he did not yet fully believe that the Son of God whom he had heard, whom he now beheld as a man in the flesh, would take away the sins of the world. In a terrible state of fear he seeks to find out whether these things he had heard were true. He sees the Lord fasting "forty days and nights," but he was loath to believe that this was the Son of God. He recalled that both Moses and Elijah also fasted for forty days. And so he asked to be given some sign that this was truly the Son of God. He therefore said, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread."

Wanting to draw Christ into the passion of vainglory, Satan did not say to him "eat" but "work a miracle." This he did, not so that Christ would be helped, but, as I said, in order to draw him to a pretentious act. But Christ, knowing this, did not obey him. Later he would not comply with the Pharisees when they wanted to see a sign from him. For they did not approach him with an undoubting heart, as to God, but were tempting him as a man. Let this therefore be an unfailing rule for the saints, not to show off before unbelievers upon any pretext of utility.

But if we examine the very order of his temptation, let us consider with what great power we are freed from temptation. The ancient enemy raised himself against the first man, our parent, in three temptations, because he tempted him with gluttony, vainglory, and avarice; but by tempting he overcame him, because he subjected him to himself through consent. Indeed, he tempted him through gluttony when he showed him the food of the forbidden tree and persuaded him to eat. He tempted him through vainglory when he said: You shall be as gods. And he tempted him through the advancement of avarice when he said: Knowing good and evil. For avarice is not only of money, but also of exaltation. For it is rightly called avarice when loftiness is sought beyond measure. For if the seizure of honor did not pertain to avarice, Paul would never say of the only-begotten Son of God: He did not consider it robbery to be equal to God. Moreover, the devil drew our parent to pride in this, that he aroused him to avarice for exaltation.

But by the same means by which he overthrew the first man, by those same means he was overcome when he tempted the second man. For he tempts through gluttony when he says: "Command that these stones become bread." He tempts through vainglory when he says: "If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down." He tempts through the greed of ambition when he shows all the kingdoms of the world, saying: "All these things I will give you, if you fall down and worship me." But by the same means by which he boasted of having conquered the first man, he is conquered by the second man, so that he might depart from our hearts, captured at the very entrance by which he had entered and held us. But there is something else, dearest brothers, that we ought to consider in this temptation of the Lord: that when tempted by the devil, the Lord responded with the precepts of sacred Scripture, and he who could have plunged his tempter into the abyss by that Word which he was, did not display the power of his might, but gave only the precepts of divine Scripture, so that he might offer us an example of his patience, that whenever we suffer anything from wicked people, we might be stirred to teaching rather than to vengeance. Consider how great is the patience of God, and how great is our impatience. If we are provoked by injuries or some harm, moved by fury, we either avenge ourselves as much as we can, or we threaten what we cannot do. Behold, the Lord endured the adversity of the devil, and answered him with nothing but words of gentleness. He bore him whom he could have punished, so that his praise might grow higher from this: that he overcame his enemy not by destroying him, but by enduring him for the time being.

(ubi sup.) If we observe the successive steps of the temptation, we shall be able to estimate by how much we are freed from temptation. The old enemy tempted the first man through his belly, when he persuaded him to eat of the forbidden fruit; through ambition when he said, Ye shall be as gods; through covetousness when he said, Knowing good and evil; for there is a covetousness not only of money, but of greatness, when a high estate above our measure is sought. By the same method in which he had overcome the first Adam, in that same was he overcome when he tempted the second Adam. He tempted through the belly when he said, Command that these stones become loaves; through ambition when he said, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence; through covetousness of lofty condition in the words, All these things will I give thee.

(ubi sup.) So the Lord when tempted by the Devil answered only with precepts of Holy Writ, and He who could have drowned His tempter in the abyss, displayed not the might of His power; giving us an example, that when we suffer any thing at the hands of evil men, we should be stirred up to learning rather than to revenge.

He was an hungred, not during the forty days, but after them. Therefore when the Lord hungred, it was not that the effects of abstinence then first came upon Him, but that His humanity was left to its own strength. For the Devil was to be overcome, not by the God, but by the flesh. By this was figured, that after those forty days which He was to tarry on earth after His passion were accomplished, He should hunger for the salvation of man, at which time He carried back again to God His Father the expected gift, the humanity which He had taken on Him.

And therefore in the temptation he makes a proposal of such a double kind by which His divinity would be made known by the miracle of the transformation, the weakness of the man deceived by the delight of food.

(Verse 3.) Say that these stones become bread. It is fittingly said to the hungry: say that these stones become bread. You are tempting him with two opposing arguments, O devil. If these stones can become bread at his command, then you are foolishly tempting someone of such great power. But if he cannot do it, then you are foolishly suspecting the Son of God. If you are the Son of God, say that these stones become bread.

(Verse 3.) Say that these stones become bread. It is fittingly said to the hungry: say that these stones become bread. You are tempting him with two opposing arguments, O devil. If these stones can become bread at his command, then you are foolishly tempting someone of such great power. But if he cannot do it, then you are foolishly suspecting the Son of God. If you are the Son of God, say that these stones become bread.

(Verse 4.) He answered and said: It is written: Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God. The testimony is taken from Deuteronomy (Deut. VIII, 3). The Lord responded in this way because His intention was to overcome the devil through humility, not power. It should also be noted that if the Lord had not begun to fast, the devil would not have had an opportunity to tempt Him, according to this: My son, when you come to serve God, prepare yourself for trials, and put your soul in order (Eccli. II, 1). But the very response of the Savior indicates that he was a man who was tempted. Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. Therefore, if anyone does not feed on the word of God, he does not live.

But that we may not, by hurrying over these victories, mar your profit, let us begin from the first assault, and examine each with exact care.

Thus, after He was an hungered, it is said, "The tempter came, and said unto Him, If Thou be Son of God, command that these stones be made bread."

For, because he had heard a voice borne from above, and saying, "This is My beloved Son;" and had heard also John bearing so large witness concerning Him, and after that saw Him an hungered; he was thenceforth in perplexity, and neither could believe that He was a mere man, because of the things spoken concerning Him; nor on the other hand receive it that He was Son of God, seeing Him as he did in hunger. Whence being in perplexity he utters ambiguous sounds. And much as when coming to Adam at the beginning, he feigns things that are not, that he may learn the things that are; even so here also, not knowing clearly the unutterable mystery of the Economy, and who He may be that is come, he attempts to weave other nets, whereby he thought to know that which was hidden and obscure. And what saith he? "If Thou be Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." He said not, because thou art an hungered, but, "if Thou be Son of God;" thinking to cheat Him with his compliments. Wherefore also he was silent touching the hunger, that he might not seem to be alleging it, and upbraiding Him. For not knowing the greatness of the Economy which was going on, he supposed this to be a reproach to Him. Wherefore flattering Him craftily, he makes mention of His dignity only.

(Serm. 39. 3.) hence he opposed the adversary rather by testimonies out of the Law, than by miraculous powers; thus at the same time giving more honour to man, and more disgrace to the adversary, when the enemy of the human race thus seemed to be overcome by man rather than by God.

The Devil who had begun to despair when he saw that Christ fasted forty days, now again began to hope when he saw that he was an hungred; and then the tempter came to him. If then you shall have fasted and after been tempted, say not, I have lost the fruit of my fast; for though it have not availed to hinder temptation, it will avail to hinder you from being overcome by temptation.

But as the Devil blinds all men, so is he now invisibly made blind by Christ. He found Him an hungred at the end of forty days, and knew not that He had continued through those forty without being hungry. When he suspected Him not to be the Son of God, he considered not that the mighty Champion can descend to things that be weak, but the weak cannot ascend to things that are high. We may more readily infer from His not being an hungred for so many days that He is God, than from His being an hungred after that time that He is man. But it may be said, Moses and Elias fasted forty days, and were men. But they hungred and endured, He for the space of forty days hungred not, but afterwards. To be hungry and yet refuse food is within the endurance of man; not be hungry belongs to the Divine nature only.

He said not, 'I live not,' but, Man doth not live by bread alone, that the Devil might still ask, If thou be the Son of God. If He be God, it is as though He shunned to display what He had power to do; if man, it is a crafty will that His want of power should not be detected.

This verse is quoted from Deuteronomy (c. 8:3). Whoso then feeds not on the Word of God, he lives not; as the body of man cannot live without earthly food, so cannot his soul without God's word. This word is said to proceed out of the mouth of God, where he reveals His will by Scripture testimonies.

Here the old serpent has fallen out with himself, since, when he tempted Christ after John's baptism, he approached Him as "the Son of God; "surely intimating that God had a Son, even on the testimony of the very Scriptures, out of which he was at the moment forging his temptation: "If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." Again: "If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence; for it is written, He shall give His angels charge concerning thee"-referring no doubt, to the Father-"and in their hands they shall bear thee up, that thou hurt not thy foot against a stone.

By and by the Lord Himself consecrated His own baptism (and, in His own, that of all) by fasts; having (the power) to make "loaves out of stones," say, to make Jordan flow with wine perchance, if He had been such a "glutton and toper.

And when the tempter came to Him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. That prowler, the devil, had heard the voice from heaven, and then he saw the Lord hunger, and he was in doubt, wondering how the Son of God could hunger. Therefore he tempts Him, to find out. He flatters Christ, meaning to snare Him by saying, "If thou be the Son of God." You might ask, "What sin was it to make bread out of stones?" Listen, then: it is a sin even to listen to anything that the devil says. Consider this as well; the devil did not say, "Command that this stone be made bread," but "these stones," wishing to cast Christ into gluttony. For one loaf would certainly suffice a man who is hungry. For these reasons, then, Christ did not listen to him.

Then the onslaught of the temptation is presented: first, to gluttony; secondly to vain glory (v. 5); thirdly to ambition (v. 8).

In regard to the first, he does two things: first, he presents the devil's attack; secondly, how Christ responded (v. 4). And the tempter came and said to him... For this could be done, so that he would approach Jesus in a bodily form.

And there are three temptations, because God tests to instruct: "God tested Abraham" (Gen 22:1). Man sometimes tests to learn, as the Queen of Sheba tested Solomon (1 Kg 10:1), where it is said of her: "Now when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon, she came to test him with hard questions." The devil tests to deceive: "For fear that somehow the tempter had tempted you" (1 Th 3:5). One who wants to test another about knowledge first tests him about general matters. But general to the whole human race are vices of the flesh, and especially gluttony. Likewise, one who wishes to attack a camp begins at the weaker part; but man has two parts, the bodily and the spiritual. The devil always tests the weaker side; hence, he first tests for bodily vices, as is clear from our first parents, whom he tested first in regard to gluttony. But the devil's marvelous astuteness in tempting should be noted: If you are the Son of God. Thus, he directly tempts about one thing and indirectly about another. Hence, in the first man he persuaded him to eat of the tree, which pertained directly to a bodily sin, namely, gluttony; but secretly he led him into pride and greed, which are spiritual sins. Hence, he said: "You will be as gods" (Gen 3:5). So in the case of Christ, for he had heard that Christ would come into the world and he seemed to be the Son of God. But he had begun to doubt whether this was the one about whom the prophecies had been made, because he found nothing in him: "The ruler of this world is coming. He has no power over me" (Jn 14:30). Hence, he suggested something pleasant to a hungry man. He also induced him to desire things that are God's. And this is, if you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread: "His word is full of power" (Ec 8:4); "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made and all their host by the breath of his mouth" (Ps 33:6). Therefore, a stone can be changed by his word. Hence, he wanted to incline him to this. If he did it, he would know that he is the Son of God; if not, he would have led him to arrogance. And it should be noted that there are many men who consent to sins of the flesh, thinking that they would not lose their spiritual stature. But if the consenting man were not to lose his spirituality by the matter to which he is tempted, the temptation would be light. This is the way the devil decided to persuade the woman by promising spiritual things.

(ord.) The Devil places us on high places by exalting with pride, that he may dash us to the ground again.

(ord.) Observe here that all these things were done with bodily sense, and by careful comparison of the context it seems probable that the Devil appeared in human form.

(ap. Anselm.) He set Him on a pinnacle of the temple when he would tempt Him through ambition, because in this seat of the doctors he had before taken many through the same temptation, and therefore thought that when set in the same seat, He might in like manner be puffed up with vain pride.

But behold, when it is said that God made man was taken up by the devil either onto a high mountain or into the holy city, the mind recoils, human ears are terrified to hear this. Yet we recognize that these things are not incredible if we consider other things that were done to him. Certainly the devil is the head of all the wicked, and all the wicked are members of this head. Was not Pilate a member of the devil? Were not the Jews who persecuted and the soldiers who crucified Christ members of the devil? What wonder is it then if he allowed himself to be led onto a mountain by him, who also allowed himself to be crucified by his members?

(ubi sup.) Behold when it is said that this God was taken by the Devil into the holy city, pious ears tremble to hear, and yet the Devil is head and chief among the wicked; what wonder that He suffered Himself to be led up a mountain by the wicked one himself, who suffered Himself to be crucified by his members.

The devil works at temptation by leading the Lord from the highest to the lowest things to reduce him to humiliation. He set him on the pinnacle of the temple, as if towering over the laws and the prophets. He knew indeed that the angels would be prompt to minister to the Son of God, lest he dash his foot against a stone. He could trample underfoot the serpent and the adder and tread on the lion and the dragon. Concerning those lower things which were taken for granted, the devil kept silent, but by mentioning the higher things, he wanted in some way to elicit obedience from the tempted One, hoping to hear an echo of his own glory in a vote of confidence from the Lord of majesty.

(Verse 5.) Then the devil took him to the holy city. This assumption, which is called, does not come from the weakness of the Lord, but from the pride of the enemy, who thinks that the will of the Savior is a necessity. From this passage, however, it is understood what is meant by what is written in another place: They went into the holy city and appeared to many (Matthew 27:53).

"Throw yourself down." It is the devil's voice by which he desires that everyone should fall down. "Throw yourself," he says. He is able to persuade, but he cannot cast down. "He will give his angels charge concerning you; and upon their hands they shall bear you up, lest you dash your foot against a stone." This we read in the ninetieth psalm. Clearly the prophecy here is not about Christ but about a holy man. The devil therefore is a poor interpreter of the Scriptures. Certainly, if he really knew what was written about the Savior, he should have also said what follows in the same psalm against him: "You will tread on the lion and the adder, the young lion and the serpent you will trample underfoot." Concerning the help of the angels, he speaks as though to a feeble man. Concerning his being trampled underfoot, he is silent like an artful dodger.Jesus said to him, "It is written further, 'You shall not tempt the Lord your God.' " The false arrows from the devil's own scriptures he breaks with the true shield of the Scripture. And it should be noted that he cited the necessary testimony from Deuteronomy that he might show the sacraments of the second law.

Took him, not because the Lord was weak, but the enemy proud; he imputed to a necessity what the Saviour did willingly.

From this first answer of Christ, the Devil could learn nothing certain whether He were God or man; he therefore betook him to another temptation, saying within himself; This man who is not sensible of the appetite of hunger, if not the Son of God, is yet a holy man; and such do attain strength not to be overcome by hunger; but when they have subdued every necessity of the flesh, they often fall by desire of empty glory. Therefore he began to tempt Him by this empty glory.

Perhaps you may say, How could he in the sight of all place Him bodily upon the temple? Perhaps the Devil so took Him as though He were visible to all, while He, without the Devil being aware of it, made Himself invisible.

Jerusalem was called the Holy City, for in it was the Temple of God, the Holy of holies, and the worship of the one God according to the law of Moses.

It should be noted, that though our Saviour suffered Himself to be placed by the Devil on a pinnacle of the temple, yet refused to come down also at his command, giving us an example, that whosoever bids us ascend the strait way of truth we should obey. But if he would again cast us down from the height of truth and virtue to the depth of error we should not hearken to him.

Otherwise, it was a suggestion to Him, as man, that He should seek by requiring some miracle to know the greatness of God's power.

This shows that the Devil lies in wait for Christ's faithful people even in the sacred places.

The pinnacle is the seat of the doctors; for the temple had not a pointed roof like our houses, but was flat on the top after the manner of the country of Palestine, and in the temple were three stories. It should be known, that the pinnacle was on the floor, and in each story was one pinnacle. Whether then he placed Him on the pinnacle in the first story, or that in the second, or the third, he placed Him whence a fall was possible.

Then the devil taketh Him up into the Holy City, and setteth Him on a pinnacle of the temple, and saith unto Him, If Thou be the Son of God, cast Thyself down: for it is written, He shall give His angels charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. "If Thou be the Son of God." As if he were saying, "I do not believe the voice from heaven; but if Thou art the Son of God, show me." Yet, O foul one, though He is the Son of God, would He have thrown Himself over the precipice? That is the mark of your own savagery, to hurl over the precipice those who are demonized; but it is the mark of God to save. But the words "In their hands they shall bear thee up" were not written of Christ, but of the saints who are in need of angelic help (Ps. 90:11-12). Christ, being God, does not need such help.

Then the devil took him to the holy city. Having described the first temptation, the second is now presented, namely, about vain glory. The order is fitting, namely, that after the devil saw himself defeated concerning a bodily vice, he should try him on vain glory or pride: "Because pride lies in wait for good works, to destroy them" (Augustine in The Rule). Regarding this temptation he does three things: first, the place of the temptation is given, secondly, the attack or endeavor of the temptation (v. 6); thirdly, Christ's resistance (v. 7).

It should be noted that Luke makes this the third temptation; here it is the second. But according to Augustine it makes no difference, because everything mentioned here is also mentioned by Luke. Furthermore, neither in Luke nor here is there any indication which was first and which was second. But Rabanus says that Luke is interested in the historical order; consequently, he arranged them as they occurred. Matthew, on the other hand, followed the nature of the temptation, because after the temptations to gluttony and vain glory, the temptation to ambition follows. For that is the way Adam was tempted: first, to gluttony, "On whatsoever day you shall eat of it, you shall die the death" (Gen 2:17); secondly, to glory: "You will be as gods" (Gen 3:5); thirdly, to greed or ambition: "Knowing good and evil."

But why does he say He took him? For this word "taken" implies force. Jerome answers that the evangelist was describing the devil's opinion, because what Christ endured through virtue, the devil took as done by his own power. He says holy, either because holy actions were performed there, namely, temporal sacrifices and the like, or on account of the holiness of the fathers of those living there. Hence, from an ancient custom he calls it holy, although it had ceased to be holy: "How the faithful city has become a harlot, she that was full of justice" (Is 1:21). But it should be noted that Mark (1:13) says that "he was in the desert forty days tempted by Satan." From this it seems that all the temptations were in the desert. Therefore, it does not seem correct to say then the devil took him... There are two responses to this: some say that all the temptations were in the desert and that they occurred according to imaginal vision, namely, that Christ so imagined and also permitted. Others say that they occurred according to bodily vision and that the devil appeared to him in a bodily form. This seems to be implied, because he says that he took him into the holy city. Some say that the reason this pertains to the desert is that Jerusalem had been deserted by the Lord. But it is better to say that what is stated in Mark (1:13) should not be understood as meaning that all the temptation took place in the desert, for he does not say this, but that he was tempted by Satan. Therefore, one must admit that the first temptation was in the desert and the other two outside the desert. But the question remains: How did the devil take him up? Some say that he carried him; others (and better) that he persuaded him to go; and Christ by the discretion of his wisdom went to Jerusalem.

And set him on the pinnacle of the temple. It should be recalled from 1 Kings (c. 6) that Solomon made three stories in the temple with a flat roof. Next to the temple he made pinnacles by which men could ascend. Concerning this he says here: He set him on the pinnacle of the temple. But whether he went to the first, or second, or third, the evangelist does not say. But it is certain that he did ascend.

But did the people not see the devil carrying Christ? The answer according to those who say that he carried him is that Christ by his own power did what others could not see. Or it can be said that the devil was in the shape of a man, and it was a custom for men to ascend that way.

But as Satan transfigures himself into an Angel of light, and spreads a snare for the faithful, even from the divine Scriptures, so now he uses its texts, not to instruct but to receive.

(ap. Anselm.) We must explain thus; Scripture says of any good man, that He has given it in charge to His Angels, that is to His ministering spirits, to bear him in their hands, i. e. by their aid to guard him that he dash not his foot against a stone, i. e. keep his heart that it stumble not at the old law written in tables of stone. Or by the stone may be understood every occasion of sin and error.

He tempts through vainglory when he says: "If you are the Son of God, cast yourself down." By the same means by which the ancient enemy tempted our first parent through vainglory when he said "You shall be as gods," so he now tempts the second Adam: but by the same means by which he boasted of having conquered the first man, he is conquered by the second man.

(Verse 6.) And he set him on the pinnacle of the temple, and said to him, 'If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, 'He will command his angels concerning you,' and 'On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.'

If you are the Son of God. In all temptations, the devil does this in order to see if you are the Son of God; but the Lord responds in such a way as to leave him in doubt.

Send yourself downward. For it is written: The voice of the devil, who always desires everyone to fall downward, says, Send yourself downward, it can persuade, it cannot force.

He has commanded his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone. We read this in the ninety-first psalm, but there it is not about Christ, but about a holy man, a prophet. Therefore, the devil misinterprets the Scriptures. Surely if he truly knew that it was written about the Savior, he should have also said what follows in the same psalm against himself: You will tread on the lion and the serpent; you will trample the young lion and the serpent. He speaks of the assistance of angels as if speaking to a weak person: he is silent about his own trampling as if a turncoat.

In the several temptations the single aim of the Devil is to find if He be the Son of God, but he is so answered as at last to depart in doubt; He says, Cast thyself, because the voice of the Devil, which is always calling men downwards, has power to persuade them, but may not compel them to fall.

This verse we read in the ninetieth Psalm (Ps. 91:11.), but that is a prophecy not of Christ, but of some holy man, so the Devil interprets Scripture amiss.

What then doth this accursed one? Overcome, and unable to persuade Him to do his bidding, and that when pressed by such violent hunger, he proceeds to another thing, saying,

"If Thou be Son of God, cast Thyself down; for it is written, He shall give His angels charge concerning Thee, and in their hands they shall bear Thee up."

What can the reason be, that at each temptation He adds this, "If Thou be Son of God?" Much the same as he did in that former case, he doth also at this time. That is, as he then slandered God, saying, "In the day ye eat, your eyes shall be opened;" thereby intending to signify, that they were beguiled and overreached, and had received no benefit; even so in this case also he insinuates this same thing, saying, "in vain God hath called Thee Son, and hath beguiled Thee by His gift; for, if this be not so, afford us some clear proof that Thou art of that power." Then, because Christ had reasoned with him from Scripture, he also brings in a testimony of the prophet.

But mark thou his folly, even by the very testimony which he produced. For while the testimonies cited by the Lord were both of them spoken with exceeding fitness: his, on the other hand, were chance and random sayings, neither did he bring forward on his part that which applied to the matter in hand. For that it is written, "He shall give His angels charge concerning Thee," this surely is not advice to dash and toss one's self down headlong; and moreover, this was not so much as spoken concerning the Lord. However, this for the time He did not expose, although there was both insult in his manner of speech, and great inconsistency. For of God's Son no man requires these things: but to cast one's self down is the part of the devil, and of demons. Whereas God's part is to raise up even them that are down. And if He ought to have displayed His own power, it would not have been by casting and tossing Himself down at random, but by saving others. But to cast ourselves down precipices, and into pits, pertains properly to his troop. Thus, for example, the juggler among them doth everywhere.

How does he expect to discover by this proposition whether He be the Son of God or not? For to fly through the air is not proper to the Divine nature, for it is not useful to any. If then any were to attempt to fly when challenged to it, he would be acting from ostentation, and would so belong rather to the Devil than to God. If it is enough to a wise man to be what he is, and he has no wish to seem what he is not, how much more should the Son of God hold it not necessary to show what He is; He of whom none can know so much as He is in Himself?

For the Son of God in truth is not borne of Angels, but Himself bears them, or if He be borne in their arms, it is not from weakness, lest He dash His foot against a stone, but for the honour. O thou Devil, thou hast read that the Son of God is borne in Angels' arms, hast thou not also read that He shall tread upon the asp and basilisk? But the one text he brings forward as proud, the other he omits as crafty.

And said to him: "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down." The devil always strikes with two arrows: for with the one he entices to vain glory, with the other to suicide. And this is if you are the Son of God. But, certainly, to throw himself down does not suit Christ, because it befits him to ascend: "No one has ascended into heaven but he who descended from heaven, the son of man, who is in heaven" (Jn 3:13). He says throw down, because his intention is always to throw headlong, as he was thrown headlong: "The dragon's tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth" (Rev 12:4). The devil also recognizes his own weakness, because those willing are overcome by him; hence he says throw yourself down, but he does not himself throw him: "Bow down, that we may pass over" (Is 51:23).

But why on the pinnacle? A Gloss says: because they taught in that place. Hence, it signifies that the devil tempted the great to vain glory, against which the Apostle says (1 Th 2:6): "Nor did we seek glory from men, whether from you or from others." And he says throw yourself down, because men who seek glory should convince others that they are showing God's sonship humble in many ways. Therefore, Cicero says in de Officiis: "The desire for glory must be avoided; for it snatches away freedom of the spirit, for which every effort should be made by magnanimous men."

Then he cites an authority: For it is written; and he uses it not to teach but to deceive. And this is taken as an argument that, as he transforms himself into an angel of light, so also his ministers, who use the authority of Sacred Scripture to deceive the simple: "The ignorant and unstable twist the scriptures to their own destruction" (2 Pt 3:16). Hence, the devil prefigured this in himself as in the head. Because he has commanded his angels concerning you.

Note that one twists the authority of Sacred Scripture in three ways:

First, when it refers to one thing and is explained of another; as when it refers to one just person and is explained as referring to Christ. For example, "Who has had the power to transgress and did not transgress" (Sir 31:10). Again, "The Father is greater than I" (Jn 14:28) is said of Christ as man. Hence, if it is explained of him as Son of God, the text is twisted. This is the way the devil says angels here, because Psalm 91 (v. 11) says this of Christ's member, who needs the guardianship of angels. This is evident, because he adds, lest you strike your foot; for this could not be said of Christ, who cannot offend by falling into any sin.

It is twisted in a second way, when someone quotes a text in favor of something for which it is not a text, as Proverbs (25:21) and Romans (12:20): "If your enemy is hungry, feed him." For if anyone does something to someone in order to be punished by God, he does this against the meaning of this text. This is what the devil did, because the Scripture intends that the just man be guarded by angels in such a way that he does not fall into danger: "The Lord is a stronghold for the oppressed" (Ps 9:9). The devil, however, suggests that one should expose himself to danger, which is to tempt God.

In the third way, when one takes what is in his favor from a text and ignores what is against him; as heretics do. This is what the devil did here, because he ignored what follows: "You will tread on the lion and the adder, the young lion and the serpent you will trample under foot" (Ps 91:13). Hence, he became the exemplar of all who twist the Scriptures.

(con. Faust. 22. 36.) It is a part of sound doctrine, that when man has any other means, he should not tempt the Lord his God.

When tempted by the devil, the Lord responded with the precepts of sacred Scripture, and he who could have plunged his tempter into the abyss by that Word which he was, did not display the power of his might, but gave only the precepts of divine Scripture, so that he might offer us an example of his patience, that whenever we suffer anything from wicked people, we might be stirred to teaching rather than to vengeance.

Thus beating down the efforts of the Devil, He professes Himself both God and Lord.

(Verse 7) Jesus said to him again: It is written: You shall not tempt the Lord your God. He breaks the false arrows of the devil's scriptures with the true shields of the scriptures. And it should be noted that he presented only the necessary testimonies from Deuteronomy, to show the sacraments of the second law.

The false Scripture darts of the Devil He brands with the true shield of Scripture.

It should be noted, that the required texts are taken from the book of Deuteronomy only, that He might show the sacraments of the second Law.

How then doth Christ? He is not indignant, nor provoked, but with that extreme gentleness He reasons with him again from the Scriptures, saying, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God:" teaching us that we must overcome the devil, not by miracles, but by forbearance and long-suffering, and that we should do nothing at all for display and vainglory.

But Christ, even when these things are said, doth not yet reveal Himself, but as man for a while discourses with him. For the sayings, "Man shall not live by bread alone;" and, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God," suited one not greatly revealing Himself, but representing Himself as one of the many.

But marvel thou not, if he in reasoning with Christ oftentimes turn himself about. For as pugilists, when they have received deadly blows, reel about, drenched in much blood, and blinded; even so he too, darkened by the first and the second blow, speaks at random what comes uppermost: and proceeds to his third assault.

Yet He says not, Thou shalt not tempt me thy Lord God; but, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God; which every man of God when tempted by the Devil might say; for whoso tempts a man of God, tempts God.

(non occ.) And it is to tempt God, in any thing to expose one's self to danger without cause.

Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. Christ calmly repels the devil, teaching us to defeat the demons with meekness.

Jesus said to him... He defends himself not by force but by wisdom: "Against wisdom, evil does not prevail" (Wis 7:30). Therefore, against that test he uses the text which explains it. As if to say: You say that I should throw myself down to see whether God will rescue me: but this is forbidden in the Scripture; hence, You shall not tempt the Lord, your God (Dt 6:16). Or another way: You tempt and by tempting you act contrary to a text; but one who acts against a text of Scripture should not use the authority of Scripture. And the Scriptures says, You shall not tempt... But you are tempting the Lord, your God, who I am: "You call me Master and Lord, and you say well, for so I am" (Jn 13:13). But the first is more in accord with the letter.

(in Luc. c. iv. 11.) Ambition has its dangers at home; that it may govern, it is first others' slave; it bows in flattery that it may rule in honour; and while it would be exalted, it is made to stoop.

(De Cons. Ev. ii. 16.) Luke has not given the temptations in the same order as Matthew; so that we do not know whether the pinnacle of the temple, or the ascent of the mountain, was first in the action; but it is of no importance, so long as it is only clear that all of them were truly done.

Satan was the most celebrated of Alpine guides, when he took Jesus to the top of an exceeding high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the earth. But the joy of Satan in standing on a peak is not a joy in largeness, but a joy in beholding smallness, in the fact that all men look like insects at his feet. It is from the valley that things look large; it is from the level that things look high.

(ord.) He saw not, as we see, with the eye of lust, but as a physician looks on disease without receiving any hurt.

(ap. Anselm.) Though Luke's order seems the more historical; Matthew relates the temptations as they were done to Adam.

He tempts through the greed of ambition when he shows all the kingdoms of the world, saying: "All these things I will give you, if you fall down and worship me."

For avarice is not only of money, but also of exaltation. For it is rightly called avarice when loftiness is sought beyond measure. For if the seizure of honor did not pertain to avarice, Paul would never say of the only-begotten Son of God: He did not consider it robbery to be equal to God. Moreover, the devil drew our parent to pride in this, that he aroused him to avarice for exaltation when he tempted him through the advancement of avarice saying: Knowing good and evil.

(Verse 8) Again, the devil took him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory, and said to him, 'All these things I will give you if you fall down and worship me.' The glory of the world, which is passing away with the world, is shown on the mountain and on the pinnacle. But the Lord descends to humble and lowly places in order to overcome the devil through humility. Furthermore, the devil hastens to lead him to the mountains, so that through the same mountains by which he himself fell, others may fall as well, according to the saying of the Apostle: 'Lest he be lifted up with pride and fall into the judgment of the devil' (1 Timothy 3:6).

(in Luc. Hom. 30.) We are not to suppose that when he showed Him the kingdoms of the world, he presented before Him the kingdom of Persia, for instance, or India; but he showed his own kingdom, how he reigns in the world, that is, how some are governed by fornication, some by avarice.

The Devil, left in uncertainty by this second reply, passes to a third temptation. Christ had broken the nets of appetite, had passed over those of ambition, he now spreads for Him those of covetousness; He taketh him up into a very high mountain, such as in going round about the earth he had noticed rising above the rest. The higher the mountain, the wider the view from it. He shows Him not so as that they truly saw the very kingdoms, cities, nations, their silver and their gold; but the quarters of the earth where each kingdom and city lay. As suppose from some high ground I were to point out to you, see there lies Rome, there Alexandria; you are not supposed to see the towns themselves, but the quarter in which they lie. Thus the Devil might point out the several quarters with his finger, and recount in words the greatness of each kingdom and its condition; for that is said to be shown whch is in any way presented to the understanding.

The Devil shows all this to the Lord, not as though he had power to extend his vision or show Him any thing unknown. But setting forth in speech as excellent and pleasant, that vain worldly pomp wherein himself delighted, he thought by suggestion of it, to create in Christ a love of it.

By their glory, is meant, their gold and silver, precious stones and temporal goods.

The statement that the devil "led him away" has to be understood with reference to God's plan, since Christ, who had foretold and sought that he should do this, had prearranged for the clear defeat of the one who should try in vain to tempt him. For in the case of Job too it says that "the devil said to the Lord." But who is so simpleminded as to suppose that the devil discusses things with God? But what he had intended, God allowed him to do, in order to demonstrate Job's indomitability. So too in the present instance, to the devil is applied whatever purpose God had wished to happen in providentially arranging all things. But as to the phrase "he showed him," it is clear that he did not show him this in substance and reality, since it is impossible to find a mountain so high that from it someone who wishes can see the whole world. Rather it was through an imaginary image, in keeping with the demon's usual custom, the clear identifying mark of which is the attempt to delude people of sound understanding by representing to them things that are not there as though they were there and things that have not happened as though they had happened.

Again, the devil taketh Him up onto an exceeding high mountain, and showeth Him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; and saith unto Him, All these things will I give Thee, if Thou wilt fall down and worship me. Some think that the high mountain is the passion of avarice into which the enemy strives to lead Jesus. But those who think this do not reason well. The devil appeared to Him visibly, for the Lord did not entertain any evil thoughts - far from it! The devil, therefore, visibly showed Him all the kingdoms, presenting them before His eyes in an image, and said, "All these things will I give Thee." In his pride, he considers the world to be his own. Even now the devil makes this offer to the greedy, with the result that those who worship him do possess these things.

Then the third temptation is presented, namely, concerning ambition or concerning greed: first, the temptation; secondly, Christ's resistance (v. 10). But the devil tempts in two ways, by deed and by word (v. 9).

In the deed two things were involved: first, he took him to a mountain; secondly, he showed him all the kingdoms of the world (v. 8b).

He says The devil took him. The taking has been explained above. But this, namely, to a mountain, can be explained in two ways.

Rabanus says that this mountain was in the desert, because, according to him, all the temptations took place in the desert. But it is called very high, as compared to others in its neighborhood. Chrysostom, however, says that he led him to one of the larger mountains of the world; and this is what the letter seems to assert, since it says a very high mountain. In this is signified that the devil always incites to pride, as he himself is proud: "Before your feet stumble on the twilight mountains" (Jer 13:16). Hence, he is also called a mountain.

He showed him all the kingdoms of the world. It should be noted that a kingdom of the world can be taken in two ways: first, spiritually; and this is the way the devil is said to reign in it: "Now is the prince of this world cast out" (Jn 12:31). Secondly, in a literal sense, so that one reigns over another: "Lo, I am calling all the tribes of the kingdoms of the north, says the Lord" (Jer 1:15). But what is said here seems to some to refer to the devil's kingdom; hence, he says He showed him all the kingdoms of the world, namely, over which he rules, and the glory of them, because when he completely rules over men, he also makes them glory: "They rejoice in doing evil and delight in the perverseness of evil" (Pr 2:14); "Why do you glory in mischief?" (Ps 52:1). Others explain it of an earthly kingdom. But then one asks, how could he show all the kingdoms of the world? Remigius says that it was done miraculously; because he showed him all the kingdoms in the twinkling of an eye, just as we read of St. Benedict that the whole world was shown to him in one glance. But it should be noted that those two do not seem good explanations, because there would have been no need to say that he took him to a very high mountain, because all this could have occurred in a valley. Hence Chrysostom explains it another way: he showed him, not that he showed each particular kingdom, but the direction in which each lay; and not only this, but the glory of them, i.e., he expressed to him the temporal glory of the world: "I will change their glory into shame" (Hos 4:7); "They glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things" (Phil 3:19).

(non occ.) See the Devil's pride as of old. In the beginning he sought to make himself equal with God, now he seeks to usurp the honours due to God, saying, If thou wilt fall down and worship me. Who then worships the Devil must first fall down.

"All these things I will give you, if you fall down and worship me." By the same means by which the ancient enemy overthrew the first man through avarice—for he tempted him through the advancement of avarice when he said: Knowing good and evil—by those same means he was overcome when he tempted the second man. But by the same means by which he boasted of having conquered the first man, he is conquered by the second man, so that he might depart from our hearts, captured at the very entrance by which he had entered and held us.

(Verse 9) I will give you all these things if you fall down and worship me. Even in this boasting, the arrogant and proud one speaks: not because he has power over the whole world or can give all the kingdoms, since we know that many holy men have been made kings by God. If you fall down, he says, and worship me. Therefore, whoever is going to worship the devil, falls before him.

An arrogant and vain vaunt; for he hath not the power to bestow all kingdoms, since many of the saints have, we know, been made kings by God.

And how saith Luke, that "he ended all temptation." To me it seems that in mentioning the chief of the temptations, he had spoken of all, as though the rest too were included in these. For the things that form the substance of innumerable evils are these: to be a slave to the belly, to do anything for vainglory, to be in subjection to the madness of riches. Which accordingly that accursed one considering, set last the most powerful of all, I mean the desire of more: and though originally, and from the beginning, he was travailing to come to this, yet he kept it for the last, as being of more force than the rest. For in fact this is the manner of his wrestling, to apply those things last, which seem more likely to overthrow. And this sort of thing he did with respect to Job likewise. Wherefore in this instance too, having begun with the motives which seem to be viler and weaker, he goes on to the more prevailing.

How then are we to get the better of him? In the way which Christ taught us, by fleeing to God for refuge; and neither to be depressed in famine, as believing in God who is able to feed even with a word; nor amidst whatever good things we may receive to tempt Him who gave them, but to be content with the glory which is from above, making no account of that which is of men, and on every occasion to despise what is beyond our need. For nothing doth so make us fall under the power of the devil, as longing for more, and loving covetousness. And this we may see even by what is done now. For now also there are those who say, "All these things will we give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship;" who are indeed men by nature, but have become his instruments. Since at that time too he approached Him, not by himself only, but also by others. Which Luke also was declaring, when he said, that "he departed from Him for a season;" showing that hereafter he approached Him by his proper instruments.

But such things as are gotten by iniquity in this world, as riches, for instance, gained by fraud or perjury, these the Devil bestows. The Devil therefore cannot give riches to whom he will, but to those only who are willing to receive them of him.

Wonderful infatuation in the Devil! To promise earthly kingdoms to Him who gives heavenly kingdoms to His faithful people, and the glory of earth to Him who is Lord of the glory of heaven!

And he said to him: "All these I will give you..." In those words he does two things: he promises one thing and seeks to obtain another. In the promise is a lie, and in the seeking is pride. In the first two temptations the devil was exploring whether he was the Son of God; now, believing that he had discovered he was not, he says All these I will give you... where the lie is that these were not in his power: "By me princes rule and nobles govern the earth" (Pr 8:16); "That the living may know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will" (Dan 4:17); otherwise, he would not have said all these I will give you; for no evil person rules without God's permission: "He makes a godless man to reign on account of the sins of the people" (Jb 34:30).

Note three things:

First, that the devil always pursues his original objective: "I will ascend into heaven above the stars of God; I will set my throne on high: I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High" (Is 14:14). And for that reason he induces men to idolatry, desiring to usurp what belongs to God. Likewise, note that no one adores the devil, unless he falls as he fell: "They fell down and worshipped the golden image" (Dan 3:7). And therefore, he says if you will fall down and worship me. Thirdly, note greed here. Hence, he promises a kingdom, by which is understood abundance of riches and excellence of honors. And he asks that he fall down, because the ambitious always humble themselves more than they ought. Hence Ambrose: "Ambition has its own danger: it bends down in deference in order to be paid honor; and while it wishes to be exalted, it is hurled down."

(De Civ. Dei, ix. 21.) After the temptation the Holy Angels, to be dreaded of all unclean spirits, ministered to the Lord, by which it was made yet more manifest to the daemons how great was His power.

But it should be noted what follows: that when the devil departed, angels ministered to him. By this, what else is shown but both natures in one person? For he is man whom the devil tempts, and he is the same God to whom angels minister. Let us therefore recognize our nature in him, for unless the devil perceived him to be man, he would not have tempted him. Let us venerate his divinity in him, for unless he were God above all things, angels would in no way minister to him.

(non occ. vid. in Ezek. 1:8. n. 24. in 1 Reg. 1:1. n. 1. 2.) In these things is shown the twofold nature in one person; it is the man whom the Devil tempts; the same is God to whom Angels minister.

When we have overcome the Devil and bruised his head, we see that Angels' ministry and the offices of heavenly virtues will not be wanting to us.

(Verse 11.) Then the devil left him: and behold, angels came and ministered to him. Temptation precedes victory. Angels minister, to demonstrate the dignity of the victor.

"And, behold, angels came and ministered unto Him." For when the assault was going on, He suffered them not to appear, that He might not thereby drive away the prey; but after He had convicted him in all points, and caused him to take to flight, then they appear: that thou also mayest learn, that after thy victories which are copied from His, angels will receive thee also applauding thee, and waiting as guards on thee in all things. Thus, for example, angels take Lazarus away with them, after the furnace of poverty and of famine and of all distress. For as I have already said, Christ on this occasion exhibits many things, which we ourselves are to enjoy.

Forasmuch then as all these things have been done for thee, do thou emulate and imitate His victory. And should any one approach thee of those who are that evil spirit's servants, and savor the things that be of him, upbraiding thee and saying, "If thou art marvellous and great, remove the mountain;" be not troubled, nor confounded, but answer with meekness, and say some such thing as thou hast heard thy Lord say: "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."

Or should he, offering glory and dominion, and an endless amount of wealth, enjoin thee to worship him, do thou stand again manfully. For neither did the devil deal so with the common Lord of us all only, but every day also he brings these his machinations to bear on each of His servants, not in mountains only and in wildernesses, nor by himself: but in cities likewise, in market-places, and in courts of justice, and by means of our own kindred, even men. What then must we do? Disbelieve him altogether, and stop our ears against him, and hate him when he flatters, and when he proffers more, then so much the more shun him. Because in Eve's case also, when he was most lifting her up with hopes, then he cast her down, and did her the greatest evils. Yea, for he is an implacable enemy, and hath taken up against us such war as excludes all treaty. And we are not so earnest for our own salvation, as he is for our ruin. Let us then shun him, not with words only, but also with works; not in mind only, but also in deed; and let us do none of the things which he approves, for so shall we do all those which God approves.

The Devil, we may fairly suppose, did not depart in obedience to the command, but the Divine nature of Christ, and the Holy Spirit which was in Him drove him thence, and then the Devil left him. Which also serves for our consolation, to see that the Devil does not tempt the men of God so long as he wills, but so long as Christ suffers. And though He may suffer him to tempt for a short time, yet in the end He drives him away because of the weakness of our nature.

He says not 'Angels descended from heaven,' that it may be known that they were ever on the earth to minister to Him, but had now by the Lord's command departed from Him, to give opportunity for the Devil to approach, who perhaps when he saw Him surrounded by Angels would not have come near Him. But in what matters they ministered to Him, we cannot know, whether in the healing diseases, or purifying souls, or casting out dæmons; for all these things He does by the ministration of Angels, so that what they do, Himself appears to do. However it is manifest, that they did not now minister to Him because His weakness needed it, but for the honour of His power; for it is not said that they 'succoured Him,' but that they ministered to Him.

Now let us shortly review what is signified by Christ's temptations. The fasting is abstinence from things evil, hunger is the desire of evil, bread is the gratification of the desire. He who indulges himself in any evil thing, turns stones into bread. Let him answer to the Devil's persuasions that man does not live by the indulgence of desire alone, but by keeping the commands of God. When any is puffed up as though he were holy he is led to the temple, and when he esteems himself to have reached the summit of holiness he is set on a pinnacle of the temple. And this temptation follows the first, because victory over temptation begets conceit. But observe that Christ had voluntarily undertaken the fasting; but was led to the temple by the Devil; therefore do you voluntarily use praiseworthy abstinence, but suffer yourself not to be exalted to the summit of sanctity; fly high-mindedness, and you will not suffer a fall. The ascent of the mountain is the going forward to great riches, and the glory of this world which springs from pride of heart. When you desire to become rich, that is, to ascend the mountain, you begin to think of the ways of gaining wealth and honours, then the prince of this world is showing you the glory of his kingdom. In the third place He provides you reasons, that if you seek to obtain all these things, you should serve him, and neglect the righteousness of God.

Then the devil leaveth Him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto Him. The Lord conquered the three temptations of gluttony, vainglory, and avarice. These are the chief passions, and by conquering them, how much more so does He conquer the others. Wherefore Luke says that the devil "ended every temptation" (Lk. 4:13), having ended these chief temptations. Whereupon angels serve Him to show that the angels will serve us as well after our victory over temptation. For everything that Christ did and revealed was for our sake, since the angels are always serving Him as God.

Then Christ's victory is presented, and it is suggested in two ways: in the devil's departure: The devil left him: "Resist the devil and he will flee from you" (Jas 4:7). And as the custom was in olden days, when men won a victory, they were honored; so here Christ's triumph is celebrated by angels. Hence, and behold angels came and ministered to him. He does not say "they descended," because they were always with him, even though they had departed for a little while according to his wish, so that the devil might have room for tempting. For they ministered in external matters, namely, in miracles and other bodily things done through the medium of angels; but in internal matters he did not need them. In this is signified that men who overcome the devil deserve the ministry of angels: "It came to pass that the beggar died, and he was carried into Abraham's bosom" (Lk 16:22). And it should be noted that the devil left Christ for a time, because later he used the Jews as his members to oppose him.

First, Christ cures the man with dropsy. The abundant flow of the flesh had oppressed the functions of his soul and had quenched the glow of his spirit.

And it happened when he entered the house of a certain ruler of the Pharisees on the Sabbath to eat bread, and they watched him closely, and behold, there was before him a certain man suffering from dropsy. The disease of dropsy takes its name from a watery humor. For in Greek, ὕδωρ means water. It is a subcutaneous liquid born from a defect of the bladder, with swelling, and foul breath. It is peculiar to the dropsical person, the more the disordered humor abounds, the more they thirst. And so it is rightly compared to him whom the flowing excess of carnal pleasures oppresses. It is compared to the avaricious rich man, who, the more abundant his riches are, which he does not use well, the more ardently he covets such things.

And it came to pass, when he entered into the house etc. Above he refuted those slandering Christ's miracles in a council; here he openly refutes them at a banquet. For in these two places especially detraction and scrutiny were accustomed to occur, namely in councils and at banquets. This part, which contains the present chapter, is divided into three parts. In the first of which he refutes the Pharisees who were watching; in the second he instructs the guests reclining at table, at that place: And he said also to those who were invited: and in the third he teaches the crowds following after, at that place: And great multitudes went with him.

First, the Pharisees who were watching are refuted, concerning which three things.

Concerning the refutation of the watchers, he proceeds in this order: because first is set forth the watching of the Pharisees: second is added the exposure of those observed, at that place: And behold, there was a certain man who had the dropsy: and third, the refutation of those exposed, at that place: And he took him and healed him. The watching of the Pharisees, by which they were watching Christ, is described with respect to two things, namely with respect to the kindness of Christ and the malice of the Pharisees.

As regards Christ's kindness, therefore, he says: And it came to pass, when he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees on the Sabbath to eat bread, in which Christ's wondrous kindness appears: great in this, that he dwelt among mortal men, though he was God; Baruch 3: "This is our God, and no other shall be esteemed in comparison to him." "Afterward he was seen upon earth and conversed with men." Greater indeed, because he dwelt among his own persecutors: whence was fulfilled in him that saying of Ezekiel 2: "Son of man, unbelievers and subverters are with you, and you dwell among scorpions." But the greatest kindness, because he dwelt among them even to intimate fellowship, so that there might be fulfilled that saying of Revelation 3: "I stand at the door and knock: if anyone shall open to me, I will enter in to him and will sup with him, and he with me." In this, therefore, that he entered another's house, Christ's humility is commended: in this, that it was the house of a Pharisee, his charity: in this, that he ate another's bread, Christ's own poverty: and in these things the supreme kindness is shown, by which the Most High willed to be humbled for us, the Most Just to dwell among the impious, the Most Rich to become poor among men: whence 2 Corinthians 8: "You know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, for your sake he became poor, that by his poverty we might be made rich."

Second, however, with regard to the malice of those watching, he adds: And they were watching him. The Evangelist does not say in what respect, so as to intimate that they were watching both his words and his miracles, and they were watching in order to censure and accuse him; above in the eleventh chapter: "The Pharisees and the lawyers began to press upon him vehemently and to assail his mouth, lying in wait for him and seeking to catch something from his mouth, that they might accuse him"; whence also John 15: "If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my word, they will keep yours also." They were also watching his miracles, according to what is said in Mark 3: "They watched him, whether he would heal on the Sabbath, that they might accuse him." Whence this watching proceeded from scheming malice, against which it is said in Proverbs 24: "Do not lie in wait nor seek wickedness in the house of the just, nor lay waste his rest." But because it is most difficult for a malicious man to escape the scrutiny of his neighbor, therefore it is said in Proverbs 23: "Do not eat with an envious man, and do not desire his foods, because in the likeness of a soothsayer and a diviner he judges what he does not know. Eat and drink, he will say to you; but his mind is not with you. The foods you have eaten you will vomit up, and you will lose your fair words."

He became the guest of his host to fulfill a duty. It says, "They watched him." Why did they watch him? They watched to see if he would disregard the honor of the law and so do something forbidden on the sabbath day. O senseless Jew, understand that the law was a shadow and type, waiting for the truth. The truth was Christ and his commandments. Why then do you arm the type against the truth? Why set the shadow in array against the spiritual interpretation? Keep your sabbath rationally.… Those who had the office to minister among you according to the law used to offer God the appointed sacrifices, even on the sabbath. They slaughtered the victims in the temple and performed the acts of service that were required of them. No one rebuked them, and the law itself was silent. It did not forbid people ministering on the sabbath. This was a type for us. As I said, it is our duty, keeping the sabbath in a rational manner, to please God by a sweet spiritual fragrance. As I have already said, we perform this when ceasing from sins, we offer God a life holy and worthy of admiration as a sacred oblation, steadily advancing to all virtue. This is the spiritual sacrifice well pleasing to God.

A Pharisee, of higher rank than usual, invited Jesus to a banquet. Although he knew their bad intentions, he went with him and ate in their company. He did not submit to this act of condescension to honor his host. He rather instructed his fellow guests by words and miraculous deeds that might lead them to the acknowledgment of the true service, even that taught us by the gospel. He knew that even against their will he would make them eyewitnesses of his power and his suprahuman glory. Perhaps they might believe that he is God and the Son of God, who took on our likeness but was unchanged and did not cease to be what he had been.

Although our Lord knew the malice of the Pharisees, yet He became their guest, that He might benefit by His words and miracles those who were present. Whence it follows, And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the sabbath day, that they watched him; to see whether He would despise the observance of the law, or do any thing that was forbidden on the sabbath day.

The Lord, although He knew the corruption of the Pharisees, nevertheless entered into their house; He entered because He was concerned for the benefit of their souls. For they, if they had wished, could have received benefit both from His words and teaching, and from the manifestation of signs.

(ubi sup.) Or we rightly compare the dropsical man to a covetous rich man. For as the former, the more he increases in unnatural moisture the greater his thirst; so also the other, the more abundant his riches, which he does not employ well, the more ardently he desires them.

(de Quæst. Evan. lib. 2. cap. 29.) Now He has aptly compared the dropsical man to an animal which has fallen into a ditch, (for he is troubled by water,) as He compared that woman, whom He spoke of as bound, and whom He Himself loosed, to a beast which is let loose to be led to water.

Mystically, the dropsical man is compared to him who is weighed down by an overflowing stream of carnal pleasures. For the disease of dropsy derives the name from a watery humour.

And behold, a certain man who had the dropsy. After having described the watching of the Pharisees, here secondly he describes the exposure of the observers; concerning which three things are introduced, namely: The infirmity disposing toward the exposure, the question that exposes, and the dissimulation that conceals.

First, therefore, with regard to the infirmity disposing toward the exposure of the observers, he says: And behold, a certain man who had the dropsy was before him. In the literal sense, this man with dropsy, by his manifest and grievous infirmity, was providing a way to confute and expose the perfidy of the Jews. And since the time and place presented themselves, therefore he says: And behold, as though the Lord had then brought him into their midst; whence Sirach 39: "The works of all flesh are before him, and nothing is hidden from his eyes." "Nor is it to be said: What is this, or what is that? For all things shall be sought in their time"; and afterwards: "All the works of the Lord are good, and every work he will furnish in its hour." Whence this bodily infirmity was effective for assailing and purging spiritual infirmity, because it was directly contrary to it. For this man with dropsy was before Jesus to implore mercy, which the Pharisees were opposing. For he was imploring the mercy of God because he was a man: for Sirach 18: "The mercy of God is upon all flesh"; and because he was an infirm man, according to that passage in Sirach 11: "There is a man who is feeble and in need of recovery, more failing in strength, and the eye of God has looked upon him for good"; and because he was before him, because such persons have recourse to God, and to such persons God condescends: the Psalm: "For he has looked down from his holy height; the Lord has looked from heaven upon the earth."

Now, with these things having been treated according to the letter, three things present themselves for our consideration according to the spiritual understanding, which according to the Saints can be drawn from the aforesaid words.

The first is the disease of dropsy, whose property is, as the Gloss says, that "the more one drinks, the more one thirsts"; and in this it designates every concupiscence, which can never be satisfied, and especially avarice, according to that saying of Proverbs 30: "The fire never says: It is enough." Whence it should be noted that there are seven, according to the expositors, accidents of dropsy. — The first is swelling of the body, and by this pride is understood: Deuteronomy 17: "All the people hearing it shall fear, so that no one thereafter may be puffed up with pride," etc.

The second is compression of spiritual things, and in this envy is understood, which compresses spiritual things; Proverbs 14: "Envy is the rottenness of the bones."

The third is stench in the breath, by which wrath is understood, which causes one to burst forth into abusive words; the Psalm: "Their throat is an open sepulchre; they dealt deceitfully with their tongues."

The fourth is sluggishness of the feet, by which sloth is understood: Titus 1: "The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy bellies"; and Wisdom 15: "Their feet are slow to walk."

The fifth is thirst in the appetite, by which avarice is understood; Proverbs 30: "The earth is not satisfied with water," that is, the earthly man with temporal opulence; and Ecclesiastes 5: "The covetous man shall not be filled with money." The sixth is swelling of the genitals, by which lust is designated; whence in the Psalm: "For my loins are filled with illusions, and there is no soundness in my flesh."

The seventh is infection of the skin or exterior parts, in which gluttony is understood, which is wholly concerned with caring for the skin: Philippians 3: "Whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things."

When then the man with the dropsy came into the midst of them, He rebukes by a question the insolence of the Pharisees, who wished to detect Him; as it is said, And, behold, there was a certain man before him which had the dropsy. And Jesus answering, &c.

(14 Mor. c. 6.) Rightly then is the dropsical man healed in the Pharisees' presence, for by the bodily infirmity of the one, is expressed the mental disease of the other.

Therefore, when the man "suffering from dropsy" came forward into the midst, the Lord looked not to avoiding giving them offense, but to bestowing a kindness on the one in need of healing. For where very great benefit is at hand, we ought not to concern ourselves with those who are foolishly scandalized.

He himself, after taking hold of him, healed and dismissed him. By provident dispensation the Lord heals the dropsical man before the lawyers and Pharisees, and soon disputes against avarice, so that through the sickness of this body, the sickness of their heart might be expressed. After many exhortations in his disputation, it is added: "But the Pharisees who were lovers of money heard all these things, and they derided him." Indeed, the dropsical man, the more he drinks, the more he thirsts. And every greedy person multiplies his thirst, who, when he has obtained the things he desires, pants for others even more.

But they who were asked, are rightly silent, for they perceived that whatever they said, would be against themselves. For if it is lawful to heal on the sabbath day, why did they watch the Saviour whether He would heal? If it is not lawful, why do they take care of their cattle on the sabbath? Hence it follows, But they held their peace.

Third, as regards the dissimulation that conceals, he adds: But they were silent. They were silent because, seeing themselves caught and exposed, they feared being confounded by their own response; whence the Gloss of Bede: "Rightly are they silent who see that whatever they might say would be said against themselves. For if it is lawful, why do they watch? If it is not lawful, why do they tend their cattle?" Whence by their silence they feigned ignorance, so as to cover over their malice. A similar instance is found in Matthew twenty-one, where, when the Lord had asked concerning the baptism of John, whence it was, they refused to answer, lest they be convicted of unbelief. Whence that passage of Sirach thirty-seven could be said of them: "O most wicked presumption! whence were you created to cover over barren malice?" But when the leaves of words failed them, they had recourse to the darkness of ignorance and the failure of words; whence they were silent not from prudence, but from ignorance, which has malice joined to it; whence Sirach twenty: "There is one who is silent, not having the sense of speech; and there is one who is silent, knowing the fitting time."

But he, taking hold of him, etc. After the exposure of the observers, there is added here the confutation of those exposed, which the Evangelist describes in three ways, namely as regards the magnificence of the deed, the efficacy of the word, and the evidence of the sign.

First, therefore, as regards the magnificence of the deed, he says: But He, having taken hold of him, healed him and sent him away. In this, that He took hold of him, His humility is apparent, because He does not disdain to touch infirmities in order to teach humility; on account of which the Apostle says in Hebrews 2: "Nowhere does He take hold of angels, but of the seed of Abraham." In this, that He healed, His power is apparent; whence above in chapter six: "Power went out from Him and healed all." In this, that He sent him away, His generosity is apparent, namely to depart as a free man. For He did not reduce him to servitude on account of the benefit conferred, but sent him away to depart as a free man; the Gloss says: "He sent him away bodily healed, so that he might turn himself to the salvation of souls." Whence above in chapter eight, to that demoniac whom He had healed, He said: "Go to your house and tell how great things God has done for you." And through this, Christ in the manner of performing that miracle, by humility confounds the pride of the Jews; by power, their sloth; by generosity and kindness, their faithlessness, since they themselves would neither deign to touch, nor were able to cure, nor were willing to set free.

The second thing, however, that we ought to consider is the work of virtue, in which is understood the healing of spiritual illness. Concerning this, three things are said, namely that he took hold of him, that he healed him, and that he sent him away. He took hold of him, namely through the infusion of grace: Isaiah forty-two: "I the Lord have called you in righteousness, I have taken hold of your hand and kept you"; Psalm: "Send forth your hand from on high, rescue me and deliver me from many waters," etc. He healed him, however, through the expiation of guilt: Psalm: "Who forgives all your iniquities, who heals all your infirmities"; and Matthew one: "He himself shall save his people from their sins." He sent him away, indeed, through the relaxation of punishment; Matthew eighteen: "The lord, having compassion on that servant, released him and forgave him the debt." And this we ask in the Lord's prayer: "Forgive us our debts," etc.

Disregarding then the snares of the Jews, He cures the dropsical, who from fear of the Pharisees did not ask to be healed on account of the sabbath, but only stood up, that when Jesus beheld him, He might have compassion on him and heal him. And the Lord knowing this, asked not whether he wished to be made whole, but forthwith healed him. Whence it follows; And he took him, and healed him, and let him go. Wherein our Lord took no thought not to offend the Pharisees, but only that He might benefit him who needed healing. For it becomes us, when a great good is the result, not to care if fools take offence.

But they, understanding where the question was leading, kept silent. Then Jesus does His work and through a touch heals the sick man.

Third, as to the evidence of the sign, he adds: And they could not reply to these things. The Gloss: "Convicted." For then it is an evident sign that a man has been convicted, when every way of escape fails him. Nor is it a wonder if they could not answer the wisdom of Christ, since not even the wisest could resist his disciples; whence below in the twenty-first chapter: "I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to resist." And this was fulfilled in Stephen, of whom Acts 6: "Then there arose certain of the synagogue which is called that of the Libertines and Cyrenians and Alexandrians, and of those who were from Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen; and they could not resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke."

Then, Christ teaches humility. At the feast, Christ gently opposes the longing for a better seat, so that the humanity of persuasion excludes the harshness of coercion, reason promotes the effect of persuasion, and correction chastises pride.

First the dropsical man is cured, in whom the abundant discharges of the flesh crushed down the powers of the soul, quenched the ardour of the Spirit. Next, humility is taught, when at the nuptial feast the desire of the highest place is forbidden. As it is said, And he spake, Sit not down in the highest room.

He also spoke a parable to those who were invited, noting how they chose the best places, saying to them, "When you are invited to a wedding, do not sit in the first place." Indeed, this admonition of the Savior is plain on the surface, teaching humility, which is praiseworthy not only before God but also among men, but since the evangelist does not call this a parable in vain, we must briefly consider what it also signifies mystically. In many passages, it appears that Christ and the Church's union are called a wedding. One such passage is: "Can the children of the wedding fast while the bridegroom is with them?" (Mark II). Another is: "The kingdom of heaven is like a king who made a wedding feast for his son and sent his servants to call the invited to the wedding" (Matt. XXII). Therefore, whoever having been invited attends these weddings, that is, unites himself to the members of the Church through the grace of faith, should not sit in the first place, that is, should not, by boasting of his merits, exalt himself as superior to others. Let him indeed strive, according to the parable of another place, to appear clad in the wedding garment, that is, shining with the splendor of virtues, but let him adorn the attire of these virtues with the place of devoted humility.

But as the Evangelist calls this admonition a parable, we must briefly examine what is its mystical meaning. Whosoever being bidden has come to the marriage feast of Christ's Church, being united to the members of the Church by faith, let him not exalt himself as higher than others by boasting of his merits.

He spoke also to those who were invited, etc. After he confuted the observers, here secondly he instructs the guests. This part is divided into three according to a threefold instruction. For first he instructs those invited to the nuptial banquet. Second he instructs those inviting to the familiar banquet, there: He said also to him who had invited him. Third he instructs those to be imitated regarding the eternal banquet, there: A certain man made a great supper, etc. The first of these regards the banquet of grace; the second, of nature; and the third, of glory; the first, sacramental; the second, material; the third, eternal and spiritual.

First, therefore, as regards the occasion introducing the parable, he says: And he spoke a parable to those who were invited: The Gloss: "A parable, signifying something else mystically." For since someone could refer that teaching of the Lord to these carnal weddings, therefore the Evangelist himself, directing the understanding of the expositor, wishes it to be understood parabolically. For this was the manner of the Lord and Savior in teaching, according to that passage of the Psalm: "I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter propositions from the beginning," etc. And because a parable has no force unless it is spoken at its proper time, according to that passage of Ecclesiasticus 20: "A parable from the mouth of a fool shall be rejected, for he does not speak it in its time"; and conversely, Proverbs 25: "Golden apples in beds of silver, he who speaks a word in its time"; therefore the opportuneness of place and time is added for the introduction of this parable about the wedding banquet, when it is added: Observing how they were choosing the first places, namely after the manner of the proud, which custom was indeed found among the Pharisees: Matthew 23: "They love the first places at feasts and the first seats in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplace"; and this as a sign of honor, according to that passage of Job 29: "If I wished to go to them, I sat in the first place." For the first and the highest are joined together; and just as pride and ambition is the disordered appetite for superiority, so also for priority. The proud seek things of this kind, who desire to be honored by others, after the example of Saul, 1 Kings 15: "Only honor me before the elders of my people and before Israel."

[On how the man who seeks inclusion in the "Inner Ring" of insiders will always be excluded, while the man who seeks only the work or the friendship itself will find himself "all unawares" in the only circle that matters]

The quest of the Inner Ring will break your hearts unless you break it. But if you break it, a surprising result will follow. If in your working hours you make the work your end, you will presently find yourself all unawares inside the only circle in your profession that really matters. You will be one of the sound craftsmen, and other sound craftsmen will know it. This group of craftsmen will by no means coincide with the Inner Ring or the Important People or the People in the Know. It will not shape that professional policy or work up that professional influence which fights for the profession as a whole against the public: nor will it lead to those periodic scandals and crises which the Inner Ring produces. But it will do those things which that profession exists to do and will in the long run be responsible for all the respect which that profession in fact enjoys. And if in your spare time you consort simply with the people you like, you will again find that you have come unawares to a real inside: that you are indeed snug and safe at the centre of something which, seen from without, would look exactly like an Inner Ring. But the difference is that its secrecy is accidental, and its exclusiveness a by-product, and no one was led thither by the lure of the esoteric: for it is only four or five people who like one another meeting to do things that they like. This is friendship. Aristotle placed it among the virtues. It causes perhaps half of all the happiness in the world, and no Inner Ringer can ever have it.

Do you see what the suppers of Christ are like, how they are turned to the profit of souls and not to the stuffing of the belly? For look, He healed the man suffering from dropsy, He taught the Pharisees that doing good on the Sabbath is a good deed. Then, when He saw that they were making a commotion over sitting in the front seats, He heals this passion too, one arising not from a small cause but from a great and hard-to-avoid one, namely vainglory. And let no one consider the teaching about this to be trivial and unworthy of the majesty of God. For you could by no means call that physician benevolent who promises to cure gout and whatever serious disease there may be, but refuses to treat a bruised finger or a toothache. Moreover, how can one consider the passion of vainglory trivial when it troubles in every way those who love to sit in the front seats? Therefore it was necessary for the Teacher, the Author and Perfecter of humility — Christ — it was necessary to cut off every branch of this evil root: vainglory. Please also take this into consideration: if it had not been the time of the meal and the Lord had begun speaking about this, setting aside discussion of other matters, they could have reproached Him. But as it was, when it was the time of the supper and when the passion for preeminence was tormenting the wretches before the Savior's eyes, His admonition was most timely.

Now let no one deem the above precepts of Christ to be trifling, and unworthy of the sublimity and grandeur of the Word of God. For you would not call him a merciful physician who professed to heal the gout, but refused to cure a scar on the finger or a tooth-ache. Besides, how can that passion of vainglory appear slight, which moved or agitated those who sought the first seats. It became then the Master of humility to cut off every branch of the bad root. But observe this also, that when the supper was ready, and the wretched guests were contending for precedency before the eyes of the Saviour, there was a fit occasion for advice.

Moreover, he is not to be respected in the end, nor by all men, who thrusts himself into honours; but while by some he is honoured, by others he is disparaged, and sometimes even by the very men who outwardly honour him.