Thursday of the 20th week after Pentecost

Let it be known to people everywhere that the Lord is God, and even though he appeared in a form like us, yet has he given us the indications of a godlike power and majesty on many occasions and in a multitude of ways. He drove away diseases and rebuked unclean spirits. He gave the blind their sight. Finally, he even expelled death itself from the bodies of men, death that cruelly and mercilessly had tyrannized humankind from Adam even to Moses, according to the expression of the divine Paul. That widow's son at Nain arose unexpectedly and wonderfully. The miracle did not remain unknown to everyone throughout Judea but was announced abroad as a divine sign, and admiration was upon every tongue.

This was a great thing in an insensible and ungrateful people. For in a short time afterward they would neither esteem Him as a prophet, nor allow that He did aught for the public good. But none of those that dwelt in Judæa were ignorant of this miracle, as it follows, And this rumour of him went forth throughout all Judæa.

And this word went forth etc. After the excellence of power in Christ has been sufficiently shown through the greatness of the twofold miracle, here secondly is shown the evidence of truth in the same through the certainty of truthful testimony, which was indeed the testimony of the Forerunner. Now for the certification of this testimony, one can and ought to proceed in two ways: either through the proof of the truth itself in itself, or through the approbation of virtue in the one testifying. The first regards the Forerunner's teaching, the second regards the Forerunner's life, both of which contribute to the corroboration of the testimony. Now John asks of him to whom he had borne testimony, not in order to remove doubt, but in order to confirm the testimony through an infallible argument.

Therefore, first is introduced the occasion of seeking from the proclamation of Christ's name: with respect to which it is said: And this report went out, namely concerning the raising of the dead man, into all Judea concerning him and into the entire surrounding region, so that all could say that word of Job twenty-eight: "With our ears we have heard the fame of him"; and Joshua nine: "We have heard the fame of his power," namely of your God: whence also in Matthew four it is said that "his fame went throughout all Syria." A figure of this preceded in King Uzziah: Second Chronicles twenty-six: "His name went out far abroad, because the Lord helped him and strengthened him."

And because we have already said above (in Luke, chapter 3) that John is a type of the Law, which was a precursor of Christ, it is right that the Law, which held captive the hearts of the faithless as if in eternal prisons, was physically enclosed, with its fertile entrails of punishments and doors of madness restrained, would not be able to bring about the complete fulfillment of the testimony of the Lord's dispensation without the consent of the Gospel. Indeed, the Law prophesied the grace of baptism through the cloud and the sea in Exodus; it foreshadowed spiritual food in the lamb (Exodus 12:3); it designated an everlasting fountain in the rock (Exodus 17:6); it revealed the forgiveness of sins in Leviticus (Leviticus 25:10); it announced the kingdom of heaven in the Psalms; it most clearly declared the promised land in Joshua.

But we have before said, that mystically John was the type of the Law, which was the forerunner of Christ. John then sends his disciples to Christ, that they might obtain the filling up of their knowledge, for Christ is the fulfilling of the Law. And perhaps those disciples are the two nations, of whom the one of the Jews believed, the other of the Gentiles believed because they heard. They wished then to see, because blessed are the eyes that see. But when they shall have come to the Gospel, and found that the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, then shall they say, "We have seen with our eyes," for we seem to ourselves to see Him whom we read of. Or perhaps through the instrumentality (operatrice) of a certain part of our Body a we all seem to have traced out the course of our Lord's passion; for faith comes through the few to the many. The Law then announces that Christ will come, the writings of the Gospel prove that He has come.

And his disciples reported to John concerning all these things. Not with a sincere heart, I think, but driven by envy, John's disciples reported to him the virtues and miracles of Christ. For elsewhere they are found complaining to him thus: Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness, behold, he is baptizing, and all are coming to him (John III). To which John then replied: A man cannot receive anything unless it has been given to him from heaven, etc. And he clearly declares both that he is a mere man and that Christ is the Son of God. But since envy and jealousy remained, and could not be expelled, observe what the excellent teacher still did to correct them.

Not, as it seems to me, in simpleness of heart, but provoked by envy. For in another place also they complain, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, behold the same baptizeth, and all men come unto him. (John 3:26.)

Now this proclamation of fame, although it was for many a cause of believing, was nevertheless for some an occasion of derision, as for the disciples of John, with respect to whom it is added: And his disciples reported to John concerning all these things. Bede: "Not with a simple heart, but spurred by envy, as elsewhere, namely in John three, they complain saying: Rabbi, he who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you bore witness—behold, he baptizes, and all come to him." Concerning such persons, in Philippians one: "Some preach Christ out of contention, not sincerely." From this therefore was taken the occasion of inquiring whether he himself was the one whom John had foretold, both for the sake of uprooting the envy of the disciples, and for the sake of putting the contention to rest, and for the sake of removing their doubt, and also for the sake of now more clearly spreading abroad the truth itself.

Certain of His disciples relate to the holy Baptist the miracle which was known to all the inhabitants of Judæa and Galilee, as it follows, And they told John, &c.

But we are then most raised up to Him when we are fallen into straits. John therefore, being cast into prison, takes the opportunity, when his disciples were most in need of Jesus, to send them to Christ. For it follows, And John calling two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come, &c.

That, then, was no celestial thing which furnished no celestial (endowments): whereas the very thing which was celestial in John-the Spirit of prophecy-so completely failed, after the transfer of the whole Spirit to the Lord, that he presently sent to inquire whether He whom he had himself preached, whom he had pointed out when coming to him, were "HE." And so "the baptism of repentance" was dealt with as if it were a candidate for the remission and sanctification shortly about to follow in Christ: for in that John used to preach "baptism for the remission of sins," the declaration was made with reference to future remission; if it be true, (as it is, ) that repentance is antecedent, remission subsequent; and this is "preparing the way.

But how could it come to pass, that Him of whom he said, Behold him who taketh away the sins of the world, he should still not believe to be the Son of God? For either it is presumption to attribute to Christ a divine action ignorantly, or it is unbelief to have doubted concerning the Son of God. But some suppose of John himself that he was indeed so great a prophet as to acknowledge Christ, but still as not a doubting, but pious, prophet disbelieved that He would die, whom he believed was about to come. Not therefore in his faith but in his piety, he doubted; as Peter also, when he said, Be it far from thee, Lord; this shall not be unto thee. (Mat 16:22.)

And John summoned two of his disciples and sent them to the Lord, saying: Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another? Namely, so that at least through this occasion, by seeing the signs he was doing, they might believe in him, and, with the master asking, learn for themselves. Therefore he does not say, Are you the one who has come, but are you the one who is to come? And the meaning is: Command me, because being about to be killed by Herod, and to descend to the underworld, whether I should announce you even in the underworld, as I announced you to those above, or whether it is not fitting for the Son of God to taste death, and you will send another to these sacraments.

He says not, Art thou He that hast come, but, Art thou he that should come. The sense is, Tell me who am to be slain by Herod, and about to descend into hell, (ad inferna) whether I should announce Thee to the souls below as I have announced Thee to those above? or is this not befitting the Son of God, and Thou art going to send another for these sacraments?

There follows therefore secondly the putting forth of the question from John's office, when it is said: And John called two of his disciples and sent them to Jesus. For this pertains to his office, the sending of disciples to Christ. For it is the office of the Precursor to send to Christ equally by word and by office, that is, both by preaching and by baptizing, according to what is said in Acts nineteen: "John baptized with the baptism of penance, saying that they should believe in him who was to come." Whence the Gloss: "He sent them to Jesus, so that by this occasion they might see the signs, and being corrected might believe in him." And Ambrose: "He sent his disciples to Christ, so that they might attain the supplement of knowledge, because Christ is the fullness of the Law, and because words without deeds usually waver, so that a fuller faith might be displayed through the testimonies of deeds than through the pledges of words." Whence he was sending them to the Truth, so that they themselves might be made certain through the truth, and having been made certain might render testimony to the truth; and therefore he sent two, because, according to that passage in John eight, you say that "the testimony of two men is true." — Because, however, they still doubted, therefore he gives them the form of inquiry, when it is added: Saying: Are you he who is to come, that is, whom I foretold was to come: John one; "After me comes he who was made before me," and in the other Evangelists. Or do we look for another? As if to say: if you are he, then another is not to be expected, lest perchance, if we look for another, we receive not Christ but antichrist, concerning whom the Lord says to the unbelieving Jews in John five: "I came in the name of my Father, and you did not receive me; if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive."

And there are three departments of counsel: That which takes examples from past times; as what the Hebrews suffered when they worshipped the golden calf, and what they suffered when they committed fornication, and the like. The second, whose meaning is understood from the present times, as being apprehended by perception; as it was said to those who asked the Lord, "If He was the Christ, or shall we wait for another? Go and tell John, the blind receive their sight, the deaf hear, the lepers are cleansed, the dead are raised up; and blessed is he who shall not be offended in Me." Such was that which David said when he prophesied, "As we have heard, so have we seen." And the third department of counsel consists of what is future, by which we are bidden guard against what is to happen; as also that was said, "They that fall into sins shall be cast into outer darkness, where there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth," and the like. So that from these things it is clear that the Lord, going the round of all the methods of curative treatment, calls humanity to salvation.

But we must altogether disallow such an opinion. For no where do we find the Holy Scriptures stating that John the Baptist foretold to those souls in hell the coming of our Saviour. It is also true to say, that the Baptist was not ignorant of the wonderful mystery of the incarnation of the Only-Begotten, and so also along with the other things had known this, that our Lord was about to preach the Gospel to those who were in hell, after He had tasted death for all living as well as dead. But since the word of holy Scripture indeed declared that Christ would come as the Lord and Chief, but the others were sent as servants before Him, therefore was the Lord and Saviour of all called by the prophets, He who cometh, or Who is to come; according to that, Blessed is he who cometh in the name of the Lord; (Ps. 118:26.) and, A little while, and he who is to come shall come, and will not tarry. (Hab. 2:3.) The blessed Baptist therefore, receiving as it were this name from Holy Scripture, sent certain of his disciples to seek whether it was indeed He who cometh, or, Who is to come.

John sent them to him not to interrogate him, but rather that the Lord might confirm those former things that John had proclaimed to them. John was directing the minds of his disciples toward the Lord.… He sent them out in such a way that, having seen Jesus' miracles, they might be confirmed in their faith in him.

We must inquire, dearly beloved brethren, why John—a prophet and more than a prophet, who pointed out the Lord coming to the baptism at the Jordan, saying: "Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sin of the world"; who, considering both his own humility and the power of Christ's divinity, says: "He who is of the earth speaks of the earth, but he who comes from heaven is above all"—why, when placed in prison and sending his disciples, he asks: "Are you he who is to come, or do we look for another?" As if he did not know the one he had pointed out, and did not know whether he was the one whom he had proclaimed by prophesying, baptizing, and pointing him out. But this question is quickly resolved if the time and order of events is considered. For standing at the waters of the Jordan, he declared that this was the Redeemer of the world; but sent to prison, he asks whether he himself is coming—not because he doubts that he is the Redeemer of the world, but he asks in order to know whether he who had come into the world by himself would also descend by himself to the prison of hell. For he whom John had announced to the world as his forerunner, he was now preceding to hell by dying. Therefore he says: "Are you he who is to come, or do we look for another?" As if he were openly saying: Just as you deigned to be born for mankind, indicate whether you also deign to die for mankind, so that I who have been the forerunner of your birth may also become the forerunner of your death, and may announce to hell that you are coming, whom I have already announced as having come to the world.

There is subjoined moreover thirdly the report of the question put forth through the ministry of the disciples, when it is added: And when the men had come to him. These two men were prefigured by the two spies sent beyond the Jordan, Joshua two. These are called men, because they manfully and faithfully fulfilled what had been commanded to them. Whence it is added: They said: John the Baptist sent us to you, so that we might inquire of you in his person. Which he notes, when he adds: Saying: Are you he who is to come, or do we look for another? Whence note that this question is proposed by the disciples in the person of John, to show that the disciples bear a doubting mind within themselves, but through John are directed to Christ.

Hence John did not pose the question on his own account, because he did not doubt in himself, but in his disciples. And this is what Chrysostom says: "Since he had learned by the Spirit, who had heard the voice of the Father, who had preached to the rest, who had borne witness, how could he doubt after so many miracles, through which he had become known to many? Had he perhaps become more timid on account of his imprisonment? Far be it, since the Lord says of him that he is not a reed shaken by the wind." Hence he did not doubt, but put forth the words of one doubting for the certainty of his disciples, just as it is said in John 11: "Where have you laid him?" and in John 6: "Whence shall we buy bread?" Gregory, however, holds that he doubted and inquired not about the first coming, of which he was certain, but about the descent into hell, in which he still had to precede Christ. Ambrose, for his part, holds that he doubted not from unbelief or slowness, like the disciples, "but from a certain piety," as is said in the Gloss.

Inasmuch as Christ by nature and in truth is God, the purpose of John did not escape Him, but as well knowing the cause of his disciples' coming, He especially at that particular time began accomplishing divine miracles many times more numerous than those which He had hitherto wrought. For so the wise Evangelist has told us, saying, "In that same hour He healed many of sicknessess and of scourges, and of evil spirits: and gave sight to many that were blind." Having then been made spectators and eyewitnesses of His greatness, and gathered into them a great admiration of His power and ability, they bring forward the question, and beg in John's name to be informed, whether He is He Who cometh.

(Thes. lib. 11. c. 4.) Or he asks the question by economy. For as the forerunner he knew the mystery of Christ's passion, but that his disciples might be convinced how great was the excellence of the Saviour, he sent the more understanding of them, instructing them to enquire and learn from the very words of the Saviour, whether it was He who was expected; as it is added, But when the men were come unto him, they said, John the Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou He, &c.

Why does John send his disciples to the Lord to ask him: Are you the one who is coming, or should we expect another? (Matthew 11:3 and Luke 7:20) When he had previously said about the same person: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. (John 1:29) We have spoken more fully on this question in the Commentaries of Matthew. Therefore, it is clear that you do not have these books yourself, since you ask such questions. However, we must briefly summarize so as not to seem completely silent. John sent his disciples while he was in prison, seeking to learn from them, and about to be beheaded, to teach them to follow the one whom he acknowledged as the master of all through his questioning. For he could not be unaware of him whom he had shown to those who were unaware, and of whom he had said, "He who has a bride is the bridegroom" (John 3:29); and "I am not worthy to bear his sandals" (Matthew 3:11); and "He must increase, but I must decrease" (John 1:27). And he heard the Father thundering out: This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased (Ibid. 3:30). But what he says: Art Thou He that shall come, or look we for another? (Matth. 3: 17). This utterance too may have this meaning: I know that Thou art He Who hast come to take away the sins of the world; but because I am to descend into hell, I ask this also of Thee, whether Thou too wilt descend thither, or is it impious to believe this of the Son of God, and wilt Thou send another thither? This, however, I wish to know, that I who have proclaimed Thee among men on earth, may also in hell proclaim Thee, if Thou art perchance coming. For Thou it is Who hast come to loose the captives, and to set free them that were bound. The Lord, understanding the purport of his inquiry, answered rather through works than by word, and bade John be told that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again, and (what is greater than these) the poor have the Gospel preached to them (Matth. 11; Luc. 7). The poor, however, are distinguished either by humility or by riches so that no difference in salvation exists between the poor man and the rich man, but all are called equally. And it is inferred: "Blessed is he who is not scandalized in me" (Matthew 11:6), he who strikes not John but his disciples who had first come to him, saying: "Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but your disciples do not fast?" (Mark 18; and Luke 5:33). And to John: "Master, you bear witness concerning him near Jordan. Behold, his disciples baptize, and many come to him" (John 3:26). With these words, he indicates jealousy about the size of the signs which comes from biting envy why should the one who was baptized by John dare to baptize? and a much larger crowd gathers to him than had previously come to John. And lest the people, unknowingly, think that John is being blackened because of what was said, he delivers a speech in his praise and begins to speak to the surrounding crowds about John: What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? But what did you go out into the wilderness to see? A man clothed in soft clothing (Matthew 11:7-8; Luke 7:24-25)? and so on. The sense of this statement is as follows: Did you come out into the wilderness to see a man, like a reed shaken by the wind, being bent in various directions? Let him doubt now about whom he had previously praised, and concerning whom he had previously said, Behold the Lamb of God, let him now ask whether he is the one himself, or whether another one will come or is coming. And because every false preaching seeks profit and strives for human glory, so that gains may be born through glory: he affirms, wearing clothing made of camel's hair, that no one can yield to flattery; and he who feeds on locusts and wild honey (Matt. 3: 4), does not seek riches or other earthly pleasures, avoids the rigid and austere life of the palace, which those who are clothed with purple and fine linen and silk and soft feathers seek. And he says that he is not only a prophet who is accustomed to predicting the future, but he is more than a prophet, because the one whom they had said would come, he has shown has come, saying: Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29) : especially since he has attained the privilege of the prophetic summit of John; that he who had said, I ought to be baptized by you (Matthew 3:14), himself has baptized him: not by the presumption of being greater, but by the obedience of the disciple and the fear of the servant. And although he affirms that among those born of women, no one greater has arisen than John (Matthew 11:11), he mentions himself, who was born of a virgin, as being greater: or he precedes all men on earth before every angel in heaven, who is least. For we progress into angels; and not angels into us, just as some snoring heavily dream. Nor is this enough in the praises of John, unless he who preached the baptism of repentance, is first reported to have said: Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (Matthew 3:1) . From the days of his preaching, the kingdom of heaven suffers violence (Ibid. 11.12); such as that man is born. He desires to be an angel; and an earthly animal seeks a heavenly abode. For the Law and the Prophets prophesied up to John (Ibid. 13): not that John is the end of the Prophets and the Law, but he who was preached by the testimony of John. But according to the mystery which is written in Malachy (chapter 4, verse 5), John is Elijah who is coming (Matthew 11:14): not that the same soul (as the heretics suspect) was in Elijah and in John, but that he had the same grace of the Holy Spirit, girded with a belt like Elijah, living in the desert like Elijah, suffering persecution from Herodias as he endured from Jezebel: just as Elijah was the precursor of the second coming, so John welcomed the Lord Savior who was coming in the flesh, not only in the wilderness but even in his mother's womb, and announced it with the joy of his body.

With this fear, therefore, even John asks the question, "Art thou He that should come, or look we for another? " -simply inquiring whether He was come as He whom he was looking for.

An ample testimony surely by which the Prophet might recognise the Lord. For of the, Lord Himself it was prophesied, that the Lord giveth food to the hungry, raiseth up them that are bowed down, looseth the prisoners, openeth the eyes of the blind, and that he who doeth these things shall reign for ever. (Ps. 146:7-10.) Such then are not the tokens of human, but divine power. But these are found seldom or not at all before the Gospel. Tobias alone received sight, and this was the cure of an Angel, not of a man. (Tob. 11.) Elias raised the dead, but he prayed and wept, our Lord commanded. (1 Kings 17) Elisha caused the cleansing of a leper: yet then the cause was not so much in the authority of the command as in the figure of the mystery. (2 Kings 5.)

In that very hour, He cured many people of diseases, plagues, and evil spirits, and He granted sight to many who were blind. John had sent his disciples to ask: Are you the one who is to come, or should we look for another? Christ demonstrated signs, not by directly answering what was asked, but to address the concerns of the messengers.

In that very hour, etc. After the question proposed, he adds the solution to the question, for the removal of the disciples' doubt and the confirmation of John's testimony. In which the Lord responds most perfectly, namely to the question and to the one asking and to every objector.

First indeed he responds to the question by performing miracles, through which it is proved that he himself is the Christ or Messiah; and on this account it is said: In that very hour, namely of the arrival of the disciples, which was indeed the hour for making truth known, according to that passage in Romans 13: "It is the hour for us now to rise from sleep," etc.; therefore in this hour, to make the truth known, he healed many. As a figure of this, it is said of Simon, the son of Onias, in Sirach 50: "He healed his nation and delivered it from destruction." And because the power of miracles is considered not only in the multitude of those healed and on the part of the persons, but also on the part of the diseases, therefore it is added that he healed from manifold illness, namely from infirmities, with regard to the prolonged nature of disease: Sirach 10: "A prolonged illness burdens the physician. A brief illness the physician cuts short," so that thus might be fulfilled that passage of Isaiah 53: "Truly he himself bore our infirmities and he himself carried our sicknesses." — From afflictions, with regard to the severity of disease, according to that passage in Jeremiah 30: "With the blow of an enemy I have struck you, with cruel chastisement." From these the Lord healed, as is petitioned in the Psalm: "Remove from me your scourges," etc. And from evil spirits, as regards the assault of external violence, which occurs through an evil spirit: 1 Kings sixteen: "An evil spirit from the Lord troubled Saul." — And to many who were blind he gave sight, in which is noted the defect of intrinsic power, so that that word of Isaiah twenty-nine might be fulfilled: "Out of darkness and gloom the eyes of the blind shall see." And through these things he manifests that he is the one who was to come: John five: "You sent to John, and he bore witness to the truth. But I have a greater testimony." "And the works that I do, they bear witness of me."

Spiritually, note here that from the cure of diseases presently exhibited is understood the perfect cure from original sin; but from the cure of diseases reported to John, the perfect cure from actual sin.

As to the cure from original sin, note that for one to be perfectly cured, it is necessary that a cure and healing be accomplished from four things which were inflicted on account of original sin, namely from concupiscence, impotence, malice, and ignorance. And these four are designated by the cure of four kinds of infirmities. For concupiscence is understood by languor, on account of its universal adherence, according to that of Isaiah 1: "Every head is languid, and every heart is sorrowful." Impotence, by the wound: Jeremiah 10: "Woe to me for my destruction! My wound is most grievous." By the evil spirit is understood wickedness; First Kings 16: "An evil spirit troubled Saul." By blindness, ignorance: Isaiah 59: "We have groped as blind men at noonday"; and Isaiah 56: "His watchmen are all blind." In the cure, therefore, of this fourfold infirmity is understood the perfect cure of original sin.

As for the perfect cure from actual sin, note that in the consummation of impiety in actual sin there are five degrees. The first is deviation in choosing, and this is designated by blindness: Lamentations 4: "The blind have wandered in the streets"; because "error and darkness were created together with sinners," according to Sirach 11. The second is disorder in pursuing, which is understood through the lame: Psalm: "Strange children have grown old and have limped from their paths"; whence 3 Kings 18: "How long do you halt between two sides?" etc. The third is contagion in associating, which is understood through leprosy: Deuteronomy 24: "Observe diligently, lest you incur the plague of leprosy"; Ezekiel 36: "Be cleansed from all your defilements." The fourth is obstinacy in persisting, which is understood through deafness, according to the Psalm: "Like the deaf asp that stops its ears." The fifth is despair in despising, because "the wicked man, when he has come into the depth of sins, despises," Proverbs 18. And this is designated by death: Isaiah 28: "We have struck a covenant with death"; and this "is the sin unto death," of which is spoken in 1 John 5.

From all these the power of Christ cures through his grace, which was designated in the pool, of which it is said in John 5, that "the Angel of the Lord descended, and the water was moved, and whoever descended first was made whole, from whatever infirmity held him." And this is "the power that went out from him and healed all," according to what is said above in chapter six.

"In that same hour he healed many of sicknesses and of scourges, and of evil spirits; and gave sight to many that were blind." He made them spectators and eyewitnesses of his greatness and gathered into them a great admiration of his power and ability.

But He knowing as God with what intention John had sent them, and the cause of their coming, was at the time performing many miracles, as it follows, And in the same hour he healed many of their infirmities, &c.

Hence also, when the Lord was asked, after enumerating the miracles of his power, he immediately responded about the humility of his death, saying: "The blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise, the poor have the gospel preached to them, and blessed is he who is not scandalized in me." Seeing so many signs and such great powers, no one could be scandalized, but only marvel.

He was in doubt whether He was actually come whom all men were looking for; whom, moreover, they ought to have recognised by His predicted works, even as the Lord sent word to John, that it was by means of these very works that He was to be recognised. Now, inasmuch as these predictions evidently related to the Creator's Christ-as we have proved in the examination of each of them-it was perverse enough, if he gave himself out to be not the Christ of the Creator, and rested the proof of his statement on those very evidences whereby he was urging his claims to be received as the Creator's Christ.

Therefore, God Himself is justified through baptism, as humans justify themselves by confessing their own sins, as it is written: 'Declare your iniquities, so that you may be justified' (Isaiah 43:26). He is justified in this, because He is not refuted by stubbornness, but His gift is acknowledged through His righteousness: 'The LORD is righteous, and He loves righteousness' (Psalm 11:8). Therefore, the justification of God is seen in this, that it appears not to unworthy and guilty ones, but to innocent ones made clean through washing and that His gifts have been transferred to the righteous. Let us justify the Lord, so that we may be justified by the Lord.

God is justified by baptism, wherein men justify themselves confessing their sins. For he that sins and confesses his sin unto God, justifies God, submitting himself to Him who overcometh, and hoping for grace from Him; God therefore is justified by baptism, in which there is confession and pardon of sin.

And all the people, hearing this, and the tax collectors, justified God, baptized with the baptism of John. God himself is justified through baptism, as men justify themselves by confessing their own sins, as it is written: 'Declare your iniquities, that you may be justified.' And He is justified in that He is not refuted through obstinacy, but His gift is acknowledged by the justice of God. For the Lord is righteous, and He loves justices (Psalm X). Therefore, the justification of God is in this, that He appears to have transferred His gifts not to the unworthy and harmful, but to those made innocent and just through purification. David also says: 'Against you only have I sinned, and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and prevail when you are judged' (Psalm L). Therefore he who sins and confesses his sin to God justifies God, yielding to Him who prevails, and hoping for grace from Him. In baptism, therefore, God is justified, in which there is both confession and forgiveness of sins.

And all the people hearing etc. Here fourthly, so that nothing may be lacking to the commendation of John, he is commended by the Lord with respect to the proclamation of his fame. And since the fame of the good is salutary to the elect and pernicious to the reprobate, according to that passage of Second Corinthians two: "We are the good odor of Christ unto God, in those who are saved and in those who perish: to some indeed the odor of death unto death, to others the odor of life unto life"; therefore he commends in a twofold manner the proclamation of fame in John: first by showing it salutary to believers, second deadly to despisers. For to the first John appeared praiseworthy, but to the second contemptible: the first were humble and the second proud.

First therefore he introduces the commendation of John from the humble who assented, when he says: And all the people hearing, namely John preaching, justified God, that is, declared Him to be just, showing themselves to be unjust, confessing their sins, according to that passage of the Psalm: "That you may be justified in your words and may overcome when you are judged." For the sinner, when he confesses his sin, declares God just and justifies himself, according to that passage of Isaiah forty-three: "Tell, if you have anything, that you may be justified"; another translation: "Declare you first your iniquities, that you may be justified." And in this manner the publicans and sinners did, hearing John, according to that passage of Matthew three: "All Jerusalem went out to him, and all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan, to be baptized by him, confessing their sins." For these two things are required for the justification of sinners, namely penance and baptism. — And therefore he adds: Having been baptized with the baptism of John: above in chapter three: "And the publicans also came to be baptized," seeking from him what they should do: whence by sign and word they approved John as an angel of God and held his name in glory. Whence when the Lord asked of the Pharisees in Matthew twenty-one: "The baptism of John, whence was it, from heaven or from men?" they said among themselves: "If we say: From heaven, he will say to us: Why then did you not believe him? But if we say: From men, we fear the crowd: for all held John as a Prophet." And therefore it is added: "The publicans and harlots shall go before you into the kingdom of heaven."

There was perchance a sort of game among the Jewish children, something of this kind. A troop of youths was divided into two parts: who, making sport of the confusion in the world, and the uneven course of its affairs, and the painful and rapid change from one extreme to the other, played some of them on instruments of music: while the rest wailed. But neither did the mourners share the merriment of those who were playing music and rejoicing: nor again did those with the instruments of music join in the sorrow of those who were weeping: and finally, they reproached one another with their want of sympathy, so to speak, and absence of affection. For the one party would say, "We have played unto you, and ye have not danced:" to which the others would rejoin, "We have wailed unto you, and ye have not wept." Christ declares, therefore, that both the Jewish populace, and their rulers, were in some such state of feeling as this; "For John came, He says, neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and they say, that he hath a devil: the Son of man came eating and drinking; and they say, Behold! a man gluttonous, and a wine drinker, a friend of publicans and sinners." By what then wilt thou be won unto the faith, O foolish Pharisee, when thou thus blamest all things indifferently, nor countest anything worthy of thy praise?

Because also they believed, they justified God, for He appeared just to them in all that He did.

(Hom. 37. in Matt.) Having declared the praises of John, he next exposes the great fault of the Pharisees and lawyers, who would not after the publicans receive the baptism of John. Hence it is said, And all the people that heard him, and the Publicans, justified God.

Let us not then despise (as the Pharisees did) the counsel of God, which is in the baptism of John, that is, the counsel which the Angel of great counsel searches out. (Is. 9:6. LXX.) No one despises the counsel of man. Who then shall reject the counsel of God?

But the Pharisees and the experts in the law rejected the counsel of God for themselves, not being baptized by him. What it says "for themselves" or "against themselves," signifies that he who rejects the grace of God acts against himself, or the counsel of God sent by themselves is rebuked by the foolish and ungrateful for refusing to accept it. Therefore, the counsel of God is that through the passion and death of the Lord Jesus, He decreed to save the world. But the Pharisees and the experts in the law rejected this, spurning the secret and saving mystery, the beginnings of which had gone before in the preaching and baptism of John, but nevertheless unknowingly and unwillingly serving that same counsel, as the apostle Peter, speaking of the Lord, says to them: "This one, delivered up according to the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, by the hands of lawless men, you nailed to a cross and put to death" (Acts 2).

These words were spoken either in the person of the Evangelist, or, as some think, of the Saviour; but when he says, against themselves, he means that he who rejects the grace of God, does it against himself. Or, they are blamed as foolish and ungrateful for being unwilling to receive the counsel of God, sent to themselves. The counsel then is of God, because He ordained salvation by the passion and death of Christ, which the Pharisees and lawyers despised.

The evil counselor is he who converts great things into nothing, as those who say that the counsels of God are evil and worthless. Such counselors were the Pharisees and Lawyers, of whom it is said: 'The Pharisees and the Lawyers rejected the counsel of God.' Would that there were none such now!

Second, he adds the contempt of John by the proud Pharisees, when he says: But the Pharisees, in whom was the pride of sanctity, and the experts of the law, in whom was the arrogance of knowledge of the truth, despised the counsel of God against themselves, not having been baptized by him, because, according to that passage below in chapter ten, "he who despises you despises me." Whence those who despised John, who was God's messenger, despised the divine counsel. Such were the Pharisees, so that the Wisdom of God could reproach them: "You have despised all our counsel"; and that passage of Isaiah chapter one was verified in them: "I have nourished and brought up children, but they have despised me." And therefore the Apostle counseled in First Thessalonians, last chapter: "Do not quench the Spirit, do not despise prophecies." — But in this they despised the divine counsel, because they refused baptism, through which divine wisdom counseled for human salvation. A figure of this preceded in the ark of Noah constructed during the flood, Genesis chapter six. On account of which it is said in First Peter chapter three: "Which also now saves you in a similar form, namely baptism."

And note that the Pharisees despised the counsel of God against themselves for six reasons. First, because they preferred human statutes to divine ones: Matthew chapter fifteen: "Why do you transgress the Law of God for the sake of your tradition?" — Second, because they preferred the justice of the Law to the justice of faith: Romans chapter ten: "Being ignorant of God's justice and seeking to establish their own," etc. Third, because they preferred appearance to truth: Matthew chapter twenty-three: "Woe to you! who cleanse what is on the outside." — Fourth, because they preferred affluence to poverty: below in chapter sixteen: "The Pharisees, who were avaricious, heard all these things and derided him," etc. — Fifth, because they preferred vain glory to humility: John chapter twelve: "They loved the glory of men more than the glory of God." Sixth, because they preferred advantage to uprightness: Matthew chapter twenty-three: "Woe to you! who say: Whoever swears by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple, he is obligated. Fools and blind," etc.

But the disobedient conduct of the Pharisees in not receiving John, accorded not with the words of the prophet, That thou mightest be justified when thou speakest. (Ps. 51:4.) Hence it follows, But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God, &c.

(Verse 53, 54.) And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these parables, that he departed from there. And coming into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, so that they marveled and said. After the parables that he spoke to the people, and that only the apostles understood, he went to his own country to teach more openly there.

Where does this wisdom and these virtues come from? The Nazarenes marvel at where he gets his wisdom and virtue; but the error is obvious, for they suspect that he is the son of a carpenter.

After the parables which the Lord spake to the people, and which the Apostles only understand, He goes over into His own country that He may teach there also.

Wonderful folly of the Nazarenes! They wonder whence Wisdom itself has wisdom, whence Power has mighty works! But the source of their error is at hand, because they regard Him as the Son of a carpenter; as they say, Is not this the carpenter's son?

Matthew says "these parables" because in a short time He would tell them other ones. He departed so that He could benefit others by His presence. "His own country" means Nazareth, for He was raised there. He was teaching in the synagogue, speaking openly in public, that they might not later have grounds to claim that He was teaching things contrary to the law.

The Nazarenes were foolish to think that low birth and plain ancestry hinder anyone from pleasing God. Let us suppose that Jesus was simply man and not God. What would have prevented Him from being a great wonderworker? So they are proven to be foolish and spiteful. They ought rather to have taken pride that their native city had produced such a good man.

The Lord is dishonored by his own. Although his wisdom in teaching and his mighty works excited admiration, their faithlessness held them back from true discernment. For they did not believe that God was doing these things in a man. Moreover, they referred to his father, his mother, brothers and sisters and took offense at him.

Thus the Lord is held in no honour by His own; and though the wisdom of His teaching, and the power of His working raised their admiration, yet do they not believe that He did these things in the name of the Lord, and they cast His father's trade in His teeth. Amid all the wonderful works which He did, they were moved with the contemplation of His Body, and hence they ask, Whence hath this man these things? And thus they were offended in him.

And what doth he now call His country? As it seems to me, Nazareth. "For He did not many mighty works there," it is said, but in Capernaum He did miracles: wherefore He said also, "And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto Heaven, shalt be brought down to hell; for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day."

But having come there, while He slackens somewhat in His miracles; so as not to inflame them unto more envy, nor to condemn them more grievously, by the aggravation of their unbelief: He yet puts forth a doctrine, having no less of wonder in it than the miracles. For these utterly senseless men, when they ought to have marvelled, and to have been amazed at the power of His words, they on the contrary hold Him cheap, because of him who seemed to be His father; yet we know they had many examples of these things in the former times, and from fathers of no note had seen illustrious children. For so David was the son of a certain mean husbandman, Jesse; and Amos, the child of a goatherd, and himself a goatherd; and Moses too, the lawgiver, had a father very inferior to himself. When they therefore, for this especially, ought to adore and be amazed, that being of such parents He spake such things, it being quite manifest, that so it was not of man's care, but of God's grace: yet they, what things they should admire Him for, for those they despise Him.

He is moreover continually frequenting the synagogues, lest if He were always abiding in the wilderness, they should the more accuse Him as making a schism, and fighting against their polity. Being amazed therefore, and in perplexity, they said, "Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these powers?" either calling the miracles powers, or even the wisdom itself.

The synagogues could not be his. A malicious and disbelieving crowd gathered there. A people full of hate rather than love came together. A group of ill-disposed and ill-mannered people assembled. "He began to teach in their synagogues, so that they were astonished." They were astonished because of indignation and not because of grace. They were amazed because of envy and not because of praise. They raged because what the proud seated on the floor were unable to discern, humility on its feet was thoroughly teaching.

"So that they were astonished, and said, 'Where did he get this wisdom?' " The one who speaks this way does not know God, from whom is wisdom and from whom are mighty works. Solomon points to that source of wisdom. While still young, he accepted the highest honor of the kingdom so he might rule the people entrusted to him with virtue and not with arrogance, with wisdom and not with pride, with his heart and not with his head. He wanted wisdom from God, earnestly asked for it and received it. "Where did he get this wisdom and these mighty works?" The mighty power that gives eyesight denied by nature, that restores hearing to those drowned in silence, that unscrambles the words of those who are mute, that enables the lame to walk again and that orders souls headed for the realm of the dead to return to their bodies is from God, unless someone envious of salvation should deny it.

He taught in their synagogues where great numbers were met, because it was for the salvation of the multitude that He came from heaven upon earth. It follows; So that they marvelled, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these many mighty works? His wisdom is referred to His doctrine, His mighty works to His miracles.

As the case stood, however, it was actually the ordinary condition of His terrene flesh which made all things else about Him wonderful, as when they said, "Whence hath this man this wisdom and these mighty works? " Thus spake even they who despised His outward form.

And coming into his own country. His country is sometimes called Nazareth, where he was brought up, and there he worked few miracles; sometimes Bethlehem, where he was born; sometimes Capharnaum, because he worked miracles there. And he taught them in their synagogues, etc. There follows the wonder. And first the wonder is set forth; secondly, its effect is identified. He says: so that they wondered. It was not surprising if they wondered; Ps 118:129: your testimonies are wonderful. They wondered whence those powers came: for wonder is caused when the effect is seen but the cause is unknown. They saw the manifest effect, but did not know the cause; hence they said: whence has this man this wisdom and these mighty works? But this was a foolish wonder, because 1 Cor 1:24 states that he is the power and the wisdom of God. But they did not know this, and therefore they wondered.

Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son.

Those heretics were called Antidicomarites who denied the virginity of Mary to the point that they claim that after the birth of Christ she had intercourse with her husband.

(Quæst. in Matt. q. 17.) No wonder then that any kinsmen by the mother's side should be called the Lord's brethren, when even by their kindred to Joseph some are here called His brethren by those who thought Him the son of Joseph.

Jude, who wrote the Catholic Epistle, the brother of the sons of Joseph, and very religious, while knowing the near relationship of the Lord, yet did not say that he himself was His brother. But what said he? "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ,"— of Him as Lord; but "the brother of James." [Jude 1] For this is true; he was His brother, (the son) of Joseph.

And verily the blessed Jeremiah says, as to our Lord Jesus Christ, "For both thy brethren and the house of thy father, they too despised Thee, and they cried out; of thy followers were they gathered together: believe them not, for they will speak fair words unto Thee." [Jeremiah 12:6] For His brethren who before the faith thought little of Him, and in the words just spoken, all but attempt to cry out against Him, were gathered together through faith, and have spoken fair words unto Him, both aiding others, and striving with words in behalf of the faith. Very watchfully did the Prophet, having named His brethren, profitably add, The house of Thy father, lest they too should be supposed to have been of the blessed Virgin, rather than of His father Joseph alone.

It helps us to understand the terms 'first-born' and 'only-begotten' when the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin 'until she brought forth her first-born son' [Matt. 1:25]; for neither did Mary, who is to be honored and praised above all others, marry anyone else, nor did she ever become the Mother of anyone else, but even after childbirth she remained always and forever an immaculate virgin

Because there are those who dare to say that Mary cohabited with Joseph after she bore the Redeemer, we reply, 'How would it have been possible for her who was the home of the indwelling of the Spirit, whom the divine power overshadowed, that she be joined by a mortal being, and gave birth filled with birthpangs, in the image of the primeval curse?' If Mary was blessed of women, she would have been exempt from the curse from the beginning, and from the bearing of children in birthpangs and curses. It would be impossible therefore to call one who gave birth with these birthpangs blessed.

For I have heard from someone that certain persons are venturing to say that she had marital relations after the Savior's birth. And I am not surprised. The ignorance of persons who do not know the sacred scriptures well and have not consulted histories, always turns them to one thing after another, and distracts anyone who wants to track down something about the truth out of his own head. To begin with, when the Virgin was entrusted to Joseph - lots having compelled her to take this step - she was not entrusted to him for marriage, since he was a widower. He was called her husband because of the Law, but it plainly follows from the Jewish tradition that the Virgin was not entrusted to him for matrimony. It was for the preservation of her virginity in witness to the things to come - [a witness] that Christ's incarnation was nothing spurious but was truly attested, as without a man's seed but truly brought about by the Holy Spirit.

And yet some very depraved men take from this the basis of their view that there were many brothers of our Lord as a point of tradition. If there had been sons of Mary who were not rather produced from a previous marriage of Joseph's, Mary never would have been transferred to the apostle John as his mother at the time of the Passion, nor would the Lord have said to them both, "Woman, behold your son," and to John, "Behold your mother," [John 19:26-27] unless perhaps he was leaving his disciple's filial love in order to comfort her who was left behind.

But clearly this was the son of the carpenter who was subduing iron with fire, melting away all the might of the world with good judgment and forming the mass into every work that was humanly useful. He was molding the formless material of our bodies into members for different ministries and for every work of eternal life. They all became irritated at these things. Among the many astonishing things he did, they were most deeply moved by his contemplativeness and his bodily self-control.

And this was the carpenter's son who subdues iron by means of fire, who tries the virtue of this world in the judgment, and forms the rude mass to every work of human need; the figure of our bodies, for example, to the divers ministrations of the limbs, and all the actions of life eternal.

How then, says Helvidius, do you make out that they were called the Lord's brethren who were not his brethren? I will show how that is. In Holy Scripture there are four kinds of brethren — by nature, race, kindred, love. Instances of brethren by nature are Esau and Jacob, the twelve patriarchs, Andrew and Peter, James and John. As to race, all Jews are called brethren of one another, as in Deuteronomy, [Deuteronomy 15:12] "If your brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto you, and serve you six years; then in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you." And in the same book, [Deuteronomy 17:15] "You shall in anywise set him king over you, whom the Lord your God shall choose: one from among your brethren shall you set king over you; you may not put a foreigner over you, which is not your brother." And again, [Deuteronomy 22:1] "You shall not see your brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and hide yourself from them: you shall surely bring them again unto your brother. And if your brother be not near unto you, or if you know him not, then you shall bring it home to your house, and it shall be with you until your brother seek after it, and you shall restore it to him again." And the Apostle Paul says, [Romans 9:3-4] "I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh: who are Israelites." Moreover they are called brethren by kindred who are of one family, that is πατρία, which corresponds to the Latin paternitas, because from a single root a numerous progeny proceeds. In Genesis [Genesis 13:8, 11] we read, "And Abram said to Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray you, between me and you, and between my herdmen and your herdmen; for we are brethren." And again, "So Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan, and Lot journeyed east: and they separated each from his brother." Certainly Lot was not Abraham's brother, but the son of Abraham's brother Aram. For Terah begot Abraham and Nahor and Aram: and Aram begot Lot. Again we read, [Genesis 12:4] "And Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son." But if you still doubt whether a nephew can be called a son, let me give you an instance. [Genesis 14:14] "And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen." And after describing the night attack and the slaughter, he adds, "And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot." Let this suffice by way of proof of my assertion. But for fear you may make some cavilling objection, and wriggle out of your difficulty like a snake, I must bind you fast with the bonds of proof to stop your hissing and complaining, for I know you would like to say you have been overcome not so much by Scripture truth as by intricate arguments. Jacob, the son of Isaac and Rebecca, when in fear of his brother's treachery he had gone to Mesopotamia, drew near and rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, and watered the flocks of Laban, his mother's brother. [Genesis 29:11] "And Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice, and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother, and that he was Rebekah's son." Here is an example of the rule already referred to, by which a nephew is called a brother. And again, [Genesis 29:15] "Laban said to Jacob. Because you are my brother, should you therefore serve me for nought? Tell me what shall your wages be." And so, when, at the end of twenty years, without the knowledge of his father-in-law and accompanied by his wives and sons he was returning to his country, on Laban overtaking him in the mountain of Gilead and failing to find the idols which Rachel hid among the baggage, Jacob answered and said to Laban, [Genesis 31:36-37] "What is my trespass? What is my sin, that you have so hotly pursued after me? Whereas you have felt all about my stuff, what have you found of all your household stuff? Set it here before my brethren and your brethren, that they may judge between us two." Tell me who are those brothers of Jacob and Laban who were present there? Esau, Jacob's brother, was certainly not there, and Laban, the son of Bethuel, had no brothers although he had a sister Rebecca.

Innumerable instances of the same kind are to be found in the sacred books. But, to be brief, I will return to the last of the four classes of brethren, those, namely, who are brethren by affection, and these again fall into two divisions, those of the spiritual and those of the general relationship. I say spiritual because all of us Christians are called brethren, as in the verse, "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity." And in another psalm the Saviour says, "I will declare your name unto my brethren." And elsewhere, [John 20:17] "Go unto my brethren and say to them." I say also general, because we are all children of one Father, there is a like bond of brotherhood between us all. [Isaiah 66:5] "Tell these who hate you," says the prophet, "you are our brethren." And the Apostle writing to the Corinthians: [1 Corinthians 5:11] "If any man that is named brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such a one no, not to eat." I now ask to which class you consider the Lord's brethren in the Gospel must be assigned. They are brethren by nature, you say. But Scripture does not say so; it calls them neither sons of Mary, nor of Joseph. Shall we say they are brethren by race? But it is absurd to suppose that a few Jews were called His brethren when all Jews of the time might upon this principle have borne the title. Were they brethren by virtue of close intimacy and the union of heart and mind? If that were so, who were more truly His brethren than the apostles who received His private instruction and were called by Him His mother and His brethren? Again, if all men, as such, were His brethren, it would have been foolish to deliver a special message, "Behold, your brethren seek you," for all men alike were entitled to the name. The only alternative is to adopt the previous explanation and understand them to be called brethren in virtue of the bond of kindred, not of love and sympathy, nor by prerogative of race, nor yet by nature. Just as Lot was called Abraham's brother, and Jacob Laban's, just as the daughters of Zelophehad received a lot among their brethren, just as Abraham himself had to wife Sarah his sister, for he says, [Genesis 20:11] "She is indeed my sister, on the father's side, not on the mother's," that is to say, she was the daughter of his brother, not of his sister...

It is clear that our Lord's brethren bore the name in the same way that Joseph was called his father: [Luke 1:18] "I and your father sought you sorrowing." It was His mother who said this, not the Jews. The Evangelist himself relates that His father and His mother were marvelling at the things which were spoken concerning Him, and there are similar passages which we have already quoted in which Joseph and Mary are called his parents. Seeing that you have been foolish enough to persuade yourself that the Greek manuscripts are corrupt, you will perhaps plead the diversity of readings. I therefore come to the Gospel of John, and there it is plainly written, [John 1:45] "Philip finds Nathanael, and says unto him, We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." You will certainly find this in your manuscript. Now tell me, how is Jesus the son of Joseph when it is clear that He was begotten of the Holy Ghost? Was Joseph His true father? Dull as you are, you will not venture to say that. Was he His reputed father? If so, let the same rule be applied to them when they are called brethren, that you apply to Joseph when he is called father.

(Verse 55, 56.) Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother called Mary, and his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did he get all these things? And they took offense at him. The error of the Jews is our salvation, and the condemnation of the heretics. For they saw Jesus Christ merely as a man, so that the carpenters thought him to be the son: Isn't this the carpenter's son? Are you surprised if they err about his brothers, when they err about his father? This place has been explained more fully in the aforementioned book against Helvedius.

(in Helvid. 14.) Those who are here called the Lord's brethren, are the sons of a Mary, His Mother's sister; she is the mother of this James and Joseph, that is to say, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and this is the Mary who is called the mother of James the Less.

And when they are mistaken in His Father, no wonder if they are also mistaken in His brethren. Whence it is added, Is not his mother Mary, and his brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?

This error of the Jews is our salvation, and the condemnation of the heretics, for they perceived Jesus Christ to be man so far as to think Him the son of a carpenter.

Under the word 'brethren' the Hebrews include all cousins and other relations, whatever may be the degree of affinity.

Helvidius displayed excessive ignorance in concluding that Mary must have had many sons, because Christ's 'brothers' are sometimes mentioned.

How then, one may say, are James and the others called His brethren? In the same kind of way as Joseph himself was supposed to be husband of Mary. For many were the veils provided, that the birth, being such as it was, might be for a time screened. Wherefore even John so called them, saying, "For neither did His brethren believe in Him."

"Is not this the carpenter's son?" The greater then the marvel, and the more abundant the ground of amaze. "Is not His mother called Mary, and His brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? and His sisters, are they not all with us? Whence hath this man these things? And they were offended in Him."

Seest thou that Nazareth was where He was discoursing? "Are not his brethren," it is said, "such a one, and such a one?" And what of this? Why, by this especially you ought to have been led on to faith. But envy you see is a poor base thing, and often falls foul of itself. For what things were strange and marvellous, and enough to have gained them over, these offended them.

I believe that He [Jesus] was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin.

I am inclined to agree with those who declare that 'brothers' really mean 'cousins' here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers.

And depreciating the whole of what appeared to be His nearest kindred, they said, "Is not His mother called Mary? And His brethren, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?" [Matthew 13:55-56] They thought, then, that He was the son of Joseph and Mary. But some say, basing it on a tradition in the Gospel according to Peter, as it is entitled, or "The Book of James," that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honour of Mary in virginity to the end, so that that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word which said, "The Holy Ghost shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you," [Luke 1:35] might not know intercourse with a man after that the Holy Ghost came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the first-fruit among men of the purity which consists in chastity, and Mary among women; for it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the first-fruit of virginity. And James is he whom Paul says in the Epistle to the Galatians that he saw, "But other of the Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother." [Galatians 1:19] And to so great a reputation among the people for righteousness did this James rise, that Flavius Josephus, who wrote the "Antiquities of the Jews" in twenty books, when wishing to exhibit the cause why the people suffered so great misfortunes that even the temple was razed to the ground, said, that these things happened to them in accordance with the wrath of God in consequence of the things which they had dared to do against James the brother of Jesus who is called Christ. And the wonderful thing is, that, though he did not accept Jesus as Christ, he yet gave testimony that the righteousness of James was so great; and he says that the people thought that they had suffered these things because of James. And Jude, who wrote a letter of few lines, it is true, but filled with the healthful words of heavenly grace, said in the preface, "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ and the brother of James." [Jude 1]

(1) Mary the mother of the Lord; (2) Mary the wife of Cleophas or Alphaeus, who was the mother of James the bishop and apostle, and of Simon and Thaddeus, and of one Joseph; (3) Mary Salome, wife of Zebedee, mother of John the evangelist and James; (4) Mary Magdalene. These four are found in the Gospel. James and Judas and Joseph were sons of an aunt (2) of the Lord's. James also and John were sons of another aunt (3) of the Lord's. Mary (2), mother of James the Less and Joseph, wife of Alphaeus was the sister of Mary the mother of the Lord, whom John names of Cleophas, either from her father or from the family of the clan, or for some other reason. Mary Salome (3) is called Salome either from her husband or her village. Some affirm that she is the same as Mary of Cleophas, because she had two husbands.

[NOTE: This is often erroneously attributed to Papias of Hierapolis, AD 130]

And the priest said to Joseph, You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the virgin of the Lord. But Joseph refused, saying: I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl. I am afraid lest I become a laughing-stock to the sons of Israel.

(non occ. cf. Serm. 135. App.) For the Father of Christ is that Divine Workman who made all these works of nature, who set forth Noah's ark, who ordained the tabernacle of Moses, and instituted the Ark of the covenant; that Workman who polishes the stubborn mind, and cuts down the proud thoughts.

Come, now, if you have read in the utterance of the prophet in the Psalms, "God hath reigned from the tree," I wait to hear what you understand thereby; for fear you may perhaps think some carpenter-king is signified, and not Christ, who has reigned from that time onward when he overcame the death which ensued from His passion of "the tree.

John was related to Jesus, in the following manner. Joseph, the Betrothed of the most pure Theotokos, had seven children by his previous wife—four sons, and three daughters whose names were Martha, Esther, and Salome. John was the son of Salome; therefore, Jesus was John's uncle. Because Salome was the daughter of Joseph—the "father of the Lord"—she was considered to be the Lord's sister; and her son, John, the Lord's nephew. Salome means "peaceful"; John means "the grace of her." May every soul understand that Christ's peace, which is offered to all men, calms the passions of the soul, and gives birth to divine grace within us. But a soul in turmoil, always battling with others and with itself, cannot be counted worthy of divine grace. Consider another marvelous thing about John. Only he is said to have three mothers: first, Salome, his natural mother; second, thunder, for he is a "son of thunder" (Mk 3:17), on account of his powerful proclamation of the Gospel ; and third, Mary, the Theotokos, concerning whom the Lord said to John, "Behold thy mother" (Jn 19:27).

The Lord had brothers and sisters, the children of Joseph which he begat by the wife of his brother Cleopas. For when Cleopas died childless, Joseph took his wife in accordance with the law and had six children by her, four boys and two girls, Mary, who was called the daughter of Cleopas, in accordance with the law, and Salome.

Without any hesitation we must abhor the error of Helvidius, who dared to assert that Christ's Mother, after His Birth, was carnally known by Joseph, and bore other children. For, in the first place, this is derogatory to Christ's perfection: for as He is in His Godhead the Only-Begotten of the Father, being thus His Son in every respect perfect, so it was becoming that He should be the Only-begotten son of His Mother, as being her perfect offspring.

Secondly, this error is an insult to the Holy Ghost, whose "shrine" was the virginal womb ["Sacrarium Spiritus Sancti" (Office of B. M. V., Ant. ad Benedictus, T. P.), wherein He had formed the flesh of Christ: wherefore it was unbecoming that it should be desecrated by intercourse with man.

Thirdly, this is derogatory to the dignity and holiness of God's Mother: for thus she would seem to be most ungrateful, were she not content with such a Son; and were she, of her own accord, by carnal intercourse to forfeit that virginity which had been miraculously preserved in her.

Fourthly, it would be tantamount to an imputation of extreme presumption in Joseph, to assume that he attempted to violate her whom by the angel's revelation he knew to have conceived by the Holy Ghost.

We must therefore simply assert that the Mother of God, as she was a virgin in conceiving Him and a virgin in giving Him birth, did she remain a virgin ever afterwards...

Some, as Jerome says on Matthew 12:49-50, "suppose that the brethren of the Lord were Joseph's sons by another wife. But we understand the brethren of the Lord to be not sons of Joseph, but cousins of the Saviour, the sons of Mary, His Mother's sister." For "Scripture speaks of brethren in four senses; namely, those who are united by being of the same parents, of the same nation, of the same family, by common affection." Wherefore the brethren of the Lord are so called, not by birth, as being born of the same mother; but by relationship, as being blood-relations of His. But Joseph, as Jerome says (Contra Helvid. ix), is rather to be believed to have remained a virgin, "since he is not said to have had another wife," and "a holy man does not live otherwise than chastely."

And they set forth their wonder and their knowledge: hence they said, is not this the carpenter's son? For he was thought to be the son of Joseph, who was not an ironworker but a woodworker: although he could also be called the son of the craftsman who fashioned the dawn and the sun, Ps 73:16. Is not his mother called Mary? They knew all the things that pertained to his humanity. About Mary it is stated above at 1:18: when his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, etc. And his brethren James and Joseph, Simon and Jude. Helvidius understood these to be sons of Mary. But this is false; rather they were his cousins. Or they are called brethren because they were of the kindred of Joseph, who was thought to be the father of Jesus. Gen 13:8: let there be no strife between me and you, for we are brethren, Abraham said to Lot: although Lot was the son of his brother.

I have never thought, still less taught, or declared publicly, anything concerning the subject of the ever Virgin Mary, Mother of our salvation, which could be considered dishonorable, impious, unworthy or evil... I believe with all my heart according to the word of holy gospel that this pure virgin bore for us the Son of God and that she remained, in the birth and after it, a pure and unsullied virgin, for eternity.

The Lord had brothers and sisters, the children of Joseph which he begat by the wife of his brother Cleopas. For when Cleopas died childless, Joseph took his wife in accordance with the law and had six children by her, four boys and two girls, Mary, who was called the daughter of Cleopas, in accordance with the law, and Salome.

And in the same way is to be understood what follows: and his sisters, are they not all with us? Therefore from those things which pertained to the flesh, they went forth into wonder, saying: whence then has this man all these things?

(Verse 58) And he did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief. Not because he was unable to do many miracles for them, who were unbelieving; but rather because in doing many miracles he would condemn the unbelieving citizens. It can also be understood in another way, that Jesus is despised in his own home and country, that is, among the Jewish people. And therefore, he performed only a few signs there, so that they would not become completely without excuse. But he performs greater signs daily among the nations through his apostles, not so much in the healing of bodies, but in the salvation of souls.

Not that because they did not believe He could not do His mighty works; but that He might not by doing them be condemning His fellow-citizens in their unbelief.

Or we may understand it otherwise, that Jesus is despised in His own house and country, signifies in the Jewish people; and therefore He did among them few miracles, that they might not be altogether without excuse; but among the Gentiles He does daily greater miracles by His Apostles, not so much in healing their bodies, as in saving their souls.

But if His miracles raised their wonder, why did He not work many? Because He looked not to display of Himself, but to what would profit others; and when that did not result, He despised what pertained only to Himself that He might not increase their punishment. Why then did He even these few miracles? That they should not say, We should have believed had any miracles been done among us.

It seems to me that the production of miracles is similar in some ways to the case of physical things. Cultivation is not sufficient to produce a harvest of fruits unless the soil, or rather the atmosphere, cooperates to this end. And the atmosphere of itself is not sufficient to produce a harvest without cultivation. The one who providentially orders creation did not design things to spring up from the earth without cultivation. Only in the first instance did he do so when he said, "Let the earth bring forth vegetation, with the seed sowing according to its kind and according to its likeness."It is just this way in regard to the production of miracles. The complete work resulting in a healing is not displayed without those being healed exercising faith. Faith, of whatever quality it might be, does not produce a healing without divine power.

Christ indeed came to his own country, because it was written, "He came among his own, and his own did not receive him." In plain fact, when he says, "A prophet is not without honor except in his own country," he is teaching that it is a painful situation to have influence among his own. To stand out among the local denizens is similar to an inflammation. A near relation's glory burns the near relations. If neighbors have to pay homage to a neighbor, they consider it servitude. "And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief." Power has no effect where unbelief does not deserve it. And while Christ does not demand a reward when he heals, he becomes indignant when injustice is shown to him instead of honor.

Hence it follows: and he did not work many miracles there; not because he could not, since he was omnipotent, but he did not, because the purpose for which he worked miracles was that they might believe in him. But they held him in contempt, because they interpreted things in a bad sense, and therefore they were not disposed to faith: yet he worked some, so that they might be rendered inexcusable; and therefore he says not many, because he worked some. And this was on account of their unbelief.