Leavetaking of Pascha / Forefeast of Ascension

There are some, then, who mutter among themselves, and sometimes speak out when they can, and even break forth into turbulent debate, saying: What did the Jews do, or what fault was it of theirs, if it was a necessity "that the saying of Isaiah the prophet should be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" To whom our answer is, that the Lord, in His foreknowledge of the future, foretold by the prophet the unbelief of the Jews; He foretold it, but did not cause it. For God does not compel any one to sin simply because He knows already the future sins of men. For He foreknew sins that were theirs, not His own; sins that were referable to no one else, but to their own selves. Accordingly, if what He foreknew as theirs is not really theirs, then had He no true foreknowledge: but as His foreknowledge is infallible, it is doubtless no one else, but they themselves, whose sinfulness God foreknew, that are the sinners. The Jews, therefore, committed sin, with no compulsion to do so on His part, to whom sin is an object of displeasure; but He foretold their committing of it, because nothing is concealed from His knowledge. And accordingly, had they wished to do good instead of evil, they would not have been hindered; but in this which they were to do they were foreseen of Him who knows what every man will do, and what He is yet to render unto such an one according to his work.

(Tr. liii. 2) But some mutter, and ask, What fault was it of the Jews, if it was necessary that the sayings of Esaias should be fulfilled? We answer, that God, foreseeing the future, predicted by the Prophet the unbelief of the Jews, but did not cause it. God does not compel men to sin, because He knows they will sin. He foreknows their sins, not His own. The Jews committed the sin, which He who knows all things foretold they would commit.

Although he had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in him: such as the sign of the raising of Lazarus: yet they did not believe, because their malice did not permit it: Wisdom 2: "Their malice blinded them." Nor did this happen by chance, but it was foreseen by the Lord and foretold through the Prophet Isaiah.

And the Evangelist, wishing to convict their immoderate stubbornness, adds also the words: before them; showing that they did not believe even what they saw.

Here he expressly foretells the opposition of the Jews to him and how they will see him and not understand who he is. He foretells how they will hear him speaking and teaching them but will be quite unable to grasp who it is that speaks with them or the new teaching he offers them. And John the Evangelist witnesses to the fulfillment of these words referring to our Savior where he says, "Though he had done so many signs before them, yet they believed not on him, that Isaiah the prophet's words might be fulfilled which he spoke, 'Lord, who has believed our report, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?' Therefore they were not able to believe, because again Isaiah said, 'He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, so that they should not see with their eyes, and understand with their heart and be converted, and I should heal them.' Isaiah said these things when he saw his glory and bore witness of him." Thus the Evangelist most certainly referred the theophany in Isaiah to Christ and to the Jews who did not receive the Lord that was seen by the prophet, according to the prediction about him.

(Hom. lxviii. 1) And thus the Evangelist tacitly explains it, when he adds, But though He had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on Him.

That they did not believe but were vexed, the Evangelist himself indicated when he said, "Though He had done so many miracles, they did not believe in Him." And of course it is a matter of no small malice not to believe so many miracles. "So many," he says, "miracles about which he [the Evangelist] kept silent." So. Jesus hid Himself in order to calm their malice, and at the same time in order to give them time and tranquility so that, having calmed down, they might consider His words and deeds. For in that case, if they had wished, they could have come to an understanding of His dignity — His Divinity. Although He knew their unbelief in advance, nevertheless, what depended on Himself, He did and permitted, giving them, as has been said, time for consideration.

He means the miracles related above. It was no small wickedness to disbelieve against such miracles as those.

Above, the Evangelist gave many examples of Christ's glory, because of which the Jews sought to kill him out of envy. Now he deals with another of the occasions surrounding his passion, that is, the unbelief of the Jews. First, their unbelief is discussed; in the second place, it is reproved by our Lord (v 44). Concerning the first he does two things: first, he reproves the unbelief of those who did not believe at all; secondly, the unbelief of those who believed, but in secret (v 42). As to the first, two things are done: first, he mentions the strange hardness of their unbelief; secondly, to show that it came about not without reason or by chance, he mentions a prophecy (v 38).

The Evangelist, as though at a loss to explain it, says that our Lord had done many miracles: such as changing water into wine, curing a paralytic, giving sight to a blind man, and raising a dead man to life: nevertheless, though he had done so many signs before them, yet they did not believe in him. They usually said: "What sign do you do, that we may see, and believe you?" (6:30). But now! The Evangelist says: though he had done so many signs before them, yet they did not believe in him. "If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin" (15:24). And so they could not say: "We do not see our signs" (Ps 74:9).

Who, i. e. so very few believed.

"But though He had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on Him: that the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" Where he makes it sufficiently plain that the Son of God is Himself the arm of the Lord; not that the person of God the Father is determined by the shape of human flesh, and that the Son is attached to Him as a member of His body; but because all things were made by Him, and therefore He is designated the arm of the Lord. For as it is with thine arm that thou workest, so the Word of God is styled His arm; because by the Word He elaborated the world. For why does a man, in order to do some work, stretch forth his arm, but because the doing of it does not straightway follow his word? And if he was endowed with such pre-eminent power that what he said was done without any movement of his body, then would his word be his arm. But the Lord Jesus, the only-begotten Son of God the Father, as He is no mere member of the Father's body, so is He no mere thinkable, and audible, and transitory word; for, as all things were made by Him, He was the word of God.

When, therefore, we hear that the Son of God is the arm of God the Father, let no carnal custom raise its distracting din in our ears; but as far as His grace enables us, let us think of that power and wisdom of God by which all things were made. Surely such an arm as that is neither held out by stretching, nor drawn in by contracting it. For He is not one and the same with the Father, but He and the Father are one; and as equal with the Father, He is in all respects complete, as well as the Father: so that no room is left open for the abominable error of those who assert that the Father alone exists, but according to the difference of causes is Himself sometimes called the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit.

(Tr. liii. 2) It is evident here that the arm of the Lord is the Son of God Himself. Not that the Father has a human fleshly form; He is called the arm of the Lord, because all things were made by Him. If a man had power of such a kind, as that without any motion of his body, what he said was forthwith done, the word of that man would be his arm. Here is no ground to justify, however, the error of those who say that the Godhead is one Person only, because the Son is the arm of the Father, and a man and his arm are not two persons, but one. These men do not understand, that the commonest things require to be explained often by applying language to them taken from other things in which there happens to be a likeness, [cand that, when we are upon things incomprehensible, and which cannot be described as they actually are, this is much more necessary. Thus one man calls another man, whom he makes great use of, his arm; and talks of having lost his arm, of having his arm taken away from him.]

That the word of Isaiah the Prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: Lord, who has believed: as if to say: few, or none: our report? That is, that which we have heard from the Lord: or that which one hears from us prophesying, because "faith comes from hearing," Romans 10. And the arm of the Lord, to whom has it been revealed? The arm of the Lord, as Augustine says, is the Son of the Father. "For just as your arm is that by which you work, so the arm of God is called the Word, by which he made the world. This arm is neither stretched out when extended nor drawn in when gathered." Nor was it only foreseen, but it also came about by the just judgment of God.

(Hom. lxviii. 2) But why then did Christ come? Did He not know that they would not believe in Him? Yes: the Prophets had prohibited this very unbelief, and He came that it might be made manifest, to their confusion and condemnation; That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which He spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?

(Hom. lxviii. 2) That the saying of Esaias might be fulfilled: that here is expressive not of the cause, but of the event. They did not disbelieve because Esaias said they would; but because they would disbelieve, Esaias said they would.

What did he see? In the spiritual vision, in the revelation of divine nature, which is incomprehensible, Isaiah saw the glory that, since it is common to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, Scripture cannot establish precisely whether it is the glory of the Son or the Holy Spirit, and therefore neither the Evangelist nor the apostle are in contradiction by saying that it is the glory of the Son or of the Holy Spirit.

In the words "they did not believe in Him, that the word of Isaiah might be fulfilled," what is expressed is not the cause, but the event. For they did not disbelieve in Christ because Isaiah had foretold it about them, but the prophet foretold it about them because they would not believe. Let us also examine the words of Isaiah: "Lord, who has believed our report?" (Isa. 53:1). This means the same as "no one believed." For the word "who" is used in many places of Scripture in place of "no one." The prophet said this as if speaking in the person of Christ. Christ speaks thus, as it were, to the Father: "Lord, who has believed our report?" — that is, no one has believed Our word and My preaching, which He called "report." For He says: "What I have heard from My Father, that I speak" (John 8:26). "And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?" — that is, the mighty working of miracles, which He called "the arm," was not revealed to any of the senseless Jews, but they slander Me even when I perform so many miracles.

Then, the testimony of the prophet on this point is cited. First, the prophecies are mentioned; secondly, it is shown that they refer to Christ (v 41). He does two things about the first: he cites the prophecy foretelling their unbelief; secondly, he adds the prophecy foretelling the reason for their unbelief (v 39).

He says: I say that they did not believe in him that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled. Here we should note that in Sacred Scripture the word "that" sometimes indicates a cause, as in "I came that they may have light" (10:10). But at other times it just indicates a sequence of events, and signifies a future event; and that is how it is used here. These people did not believe, but it was not because Isaiah predicted this. Rather, Isaiah predicted this because they were not going to believe. And so this saying of Isaiah is fulfilled from the fact that they did not believe. "Everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled" (Lk 24:44); "Not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished" (Matt 5:18).

But if it was necessary that the saying of Isaiah be fulfilled, it seems that the Jews should be excused for not believing, for they could not act contrary to the prophecy. I answer that the prophecy took account of their freedom. For God, knowing the future beforehand, foretold their unbelief in the prophecy, but he did not bring it about; for God does not force one to sin just because he already knows one's future sins. And so our Lord, from whom nothing is hidden, predicted that the Jews would commit the sin which they did commit.

Now the Evangelist states what the prophet said, Lord, who has believed our report, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? Here we should note that belief comes in two ways. Sometimes by instruction from another; and this is the usual way: "So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ" (Rom 10:17). Sometimes it comes by a divine revelation; and this is the special way, spoken of by the Apostle: "For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal 1:12).

Isaiah foretold that there would be few believers. First, as to those who would believe in the usual way, by instruction, he says, Lord, who has believed our report? This can be understood in two ways. In one way, the meaning is: who has believed our report? That is, what you reported to us, what we have heard from you. "We have heard tidings from the Lord" (Obad 1:1); "Let us hear what the Lord will speak" (Ps 85:8). It is like they were saying: "Lord, we have heard these things from you. But who will believe us when we tell what we have heard from you about your birth and passion?" This entire chapter of Isaiah (ch. 53) is speaking of these things.

Prophets are said to hear in order to suggest the way in which the prophets are instructed. By sight, a person receives an immediate knowledge of the thing seen, but by hearing he does not have an immediate knowledge of what he hears, but he gains his knowledge from certain signs of the thing. And so because the prophets did not immediately see the divine essence, but only certain signs of divine realities, they are said to hear. "If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream," by certain signs (Num 12:6). The Son, however, eternally sees the divine essence itself: "No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known," as was said above (1:18). Who has believed our report? That is, who has believed in the things we have heard and preached? "What I have heard from the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, I announce to you" (Is 21:10).

The second way of understanding who has believed our report? is to take it as meaning the things we report to them, what they have heard from us. "They hear what you say but they will not do it" as Ezekiel (33:31) says.

As to the special way belief comes, by revelation, he says, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? The "arm" refers to the Son, through whom the Father does all things, just as we accomplish things through our arm. And if we accomplished things only through an interior word, then this word would be called our arm. And so the Son is called the arm of God not because God the Father has a human shape and a physical arm, but because "all things were made through him," the Son (1:3). "Have you an arm like God, and can you thunder with a voice like his?" (Job 40:9); "He has shown strength with his arm" (Lk 1:51).

Here we should note that Sabellius misunderstood this passage and said that the Father and the Son are the same person; and Arius also did when he said that the Son is inferior to the Father. The reasons for this were that a person and his arm do not form two persons, but only one, and an arm is not equal to the person. The answer to this is that in expressions of this kind the similarities are not really adequate, for what we find in creatures does not perfectly represent what is in God. Thus Dionysius says that symbolic theology is not argumentative. Thus the Son is not called an arm as though he is the same person as the Father or inferior to the Father, but because the Father does all things through him. When he says, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? it is like saying, only to a few, that is, to the apostles: "God has revealed to us through the Spirit" (1 Cor 2:10).

But the words of the Gospel also, that follow, are still more pressing, and start a question of more profound import: for He goes on to say, "Therefore they could not believe, because that Isaiah said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." For it is said to us: If they could not believe, what sin is it in man not to do what he cannot do and if they sinned in not believing, then they had the power to believe, and did not use it. If, then, they had the power, how says the Gospel, "Therefore they could not believe, because that Isaiah said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart;" so that (which is of grave import) to God Himself is referred the cause of their not believing, inasmuch as it is He who "hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart"?

"They could not believe," because that Isaiah the prophet foretold it; and the prophet foretold it because God foreknew that such would be the case. But if I am asked why they could not, I reply at once, because they would not; for certainly their depraved will was foreseen by God, and foretold through the prophet by Him from whom nothing that is future can be hid.

(Tr. liii. 5) But what follows involved a deeper question: Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts, that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. That they should not believe; but if so, what sin is there in a man doing what he cannot help doing? And what is a graver point still, the cause is assigned to God; since He it is who blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart. This is not said to be the devil's doing, but God's. Yet if any ask why they could not believe, I answer, Because they would not. For as it is to the praise of the Divine will that God cannot deny Himself, so is it the fault of the human will that they could not believe.

For this reason they could not believe, in him, because evidently they were blinded, and this Isaiah said.

It was not however with intent to fulfil the prophecies that the Jews slew the Lord, for in that case they would not have been impious; but it was by reason of their own malignity. For although the prophets foretold the things which were certainly to be brought to pass by their determined evil counsel, they foretold it for this cause, that the sober might leap over the pitfalls of the devil: for surely they who heard might also have taken heed. On which, account also the prediction was needful.

That it was not God Who blinded the Jews. For else He would not have required them to give account thereof, forasmuch as He surely pardons involuntary offences. But the meaning is on this wise. It is just as though Isaiah were setting before us, as having been spoken by God, the words: "If I should become a Man, and with Mine own voice expound unto you what is profitable, not even so will ye hearken unto Me, as neither did ye hearken unto the prophets; neither, when ye see signs beyond description, will ye be profited aught by seeing them." This is really what "Ye will not see" means. For He did not say: "I will harden their hearts and blind their eyes;" but He said: "Although ye hear, ye will not hear; and though ye see, ye will not see, in order that ye may not be converted and I may heal you." For if they had heard and seen in such a way as they ought, they would surely have found benefit thereby. And so the passage contains no indication of an inevitable punishment, nor does it set forth a decree of One condemning and sentencing the Jews; but it is a prediction given with a good purpose. For He knew what manner of men they were going to become, and He made a declaration concerning them. Yet the saying does not go against all [the Jews], but only against the unbelieving; for many of them have believed. In this way therefore the Seventy have rendered the passage. But it is likely that the Evangelist followed the text of the Hebrews, which differs from that of the Seventy, and therefore said: For this cause they could not believe, because: He hath blinded them; and so far as the actual wording of the prophet goes, he has not said that "God" blinded them. And it is likely that some one else did this, in order that the Jews should not convert and find healing. But even though we should accept the supposition that God blinded them, yet it must be understood in this way;----that He allowed them to suffer blinding at the hands of the devil, when they were not good as regards their character. For in this way He gives up to a reprobate mind and to passion those who are of a disposition like theirs. But whilst they were such, it was not just that they should know the depth of the mystery and its secrets, seeing that they were men that kept not even the commandments of the Law. Whereas then they received neither the Law nor the ordinances of the Gospel, closing fast the eye of their understanding; on this account they receive not the instruction that is able to illuminate them.

(Hom. lxviii. 2) This is a common form of speech among ourselves. I cannot love such a man, meaning by this necessity only a vehement will. The Evangelist says could not, to show that it was impossible that the Prophet should lie, not that it was impossible that they should believe.

The same thought is expressed in the words "therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again of them." By all this He wants to confirm that Scripture is not false and that the prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled exactly as he had foretold. Lest anyone should begin to speak and wonder why Christ came at all if He knew that the Jews would not believe in Him, the Evangelist for this reason brings forward the prophets who foretold this. Christ, although He knew of their unbelief, nevertheless came so that they would have no excuse for their sin and could not say that they would have believed if He had come. The words "they could not believe" mean the same as "they would not." For an evil and crafty man, so long as he remains such, that is, chooses evil, cannot believe.

When the Evangelist says, therefore they could not believe, he states the prophecy which foretold the reason for their unbelief. If we examine these words of the Evangelist they seem, if taken at their surface value, difficult to understand. First, because if it is said that therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said this, the Jews seem to be excusable. For is it a sin for a person not to do what he cannot do? And what is more serious, the fault will be cast back on God, since he blinded their eyes. This could be accepted if it were said of the devil, as in 2 Corinthians (4:4): "The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers." But here it is said of our Lord, for Isaiah (6:1) says: "I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne," and follows with "Blind the heart of this people and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and be converted and I heal them" (Is 6:10).

To clarify this let us first explain the statement, therefore they could not believe. Here we should note that something is said to be impossible or said to be necessary in two ways: absolutely, and granted a certain presupposition. For example, it is absolutely impossible for a human being to be an ass; but granting a certain presupposition, it is impossible for me to be outside my house, presupposing, that is, that I remain within it sitting down. With this in mind, we may say that a person is excused if he does not do things that are absolutely impossible for him. But he is not excused if he does not do things that are impossible for him granting some presupposition. So, if someone has the evil intention of always stealing, and says that it is impossible for him not to sin as long as he continues with that intention, he is not excused: for this impossibility is not absolute, but based on a certain presupposition, for he can abandon his evil intention. So he says, therefore they could not believe, that is, because they had a will clouded over by their wickedness: "Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil" (Jer 13:23); "How can you do good things when you are evil?" (Mt 12:34). It is like one saying: "I can in nowise love him, because I hate him."

As to the second point, when we read that God blinds and hardens, we should not think that God puts malice into us or forces us to sin; but we should understand it as meaning that God does not infuse grace. Now he infuses grace because of his mercy, while the cause of his not infusing grace is due to us, insofar as there is something in us which opposes divine grace. As far as he is concerned: "He enlightens every man coming into this world" (1:9); "He desires all men to be saved" (1 Tim 2:4). But because we leave God, he takes his grace from us: "Because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you" (Hos 4:6), "Your destruction, O Israel, is from yourself; your help is only in me" (Hos 13:9). It is like a person who closes the shutters of his house, and someone says to him: "You cannot see because you lack the light of the sun." This would not be due to a failure of the sun, but because he shut out the light of the sun. In the same way we read here that they could not believe, because God blinded them, that is, they were the cause why they were deprived of sight as in "Their wickedness blinded them" (Wis 2:21).

But the prophet, sayest thou, assigns another cause than that of their will. What cause does the prophet assign? That "God hath given them the spirit of remorse, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear; and hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart." This also, I reply, their will deserved. For God thus blinds and hardens, simply by letting alone and withdrawing His aid: and God can do this by a judgment that is hidden, although not by one that is unrighteous. This is a doctrine which the piety of the God-fearing ought to preserve unshaken and inviolable in all its integrity: even as the apostle, when treating of the same intricate question, says, "What shall we say then? is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid." If, then, we must be far from thinking that there is unrighteousness with God, this only can it be, that, when He giveth His aid, He acteth mercifully; and, when He withholdeth it, He acteth righteously: for in all He doeth, He acteth not rashly, but in accordance with judgment.

(Tr. liii. 5) But the Prophet, you say, mentions another cause, not their will; viz. that God had blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart. But I answer, that they well deserved this. For God hardens and blinds a man, by forsaking and not supporting him; and this He may by a secret sentence, by an unjust one He cannot.

(Tr. liii. 11) And be converted, and I should heal them. Is not to be understood here, from the beginning of the sentence—that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor be converted; conversion being the free gift of God? or shall we suppose that a heavenly remedy is meant; whereby those who wished to establish their own righteousness, were so far deserted and blinded, as to stumble on the stumbling stone, till, with confusion of face, they humbled themselves, and sought not their own righteousness which puffeth up the proud, but God's righteousness, which justifieth the ungodly. For many of those who put Christ to death, were afterward troubled with a sense of their guilt; which led to their believing in Him.

He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart: Isaiah 6: "Blind the heart of this people and make heavy their ears and shut their eyes" etc.: and Romans 1: "God gave them over to a reprobate mind." So that they may not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart and, by understanding, be converted, and, by converting, I may heal them; Jeremiah 3: "Return to me, and I will heal your backslidings."

Question I. But it is asked here first concerning what he says, that they could not believe, because Isaiah said: He has blinded, etc.

It seems first that he speaks incorrectly, because if they could not believe, then it was not to be imputed to them as sin.

To this Chrysostom responds: "They could not, that is, they would not."

But that does not resolve the matter: 1. because then it would be easy to resolve everything: why did the Evangelist not say "they would not," since he had it so readily at hand?

2. Likewise, granted that this were the meaning — they would not believe — because Isaiah says: He has blinded their eyes, then it seems that God is the cause of their evil will.

I respond: It must be said that something's not being able is said in two ways: either because it in no way can, or because it can only with great difficulty: thus it is said that a man accustomed to evil cannot do good; Jeremiah thirteen: "If the Ethiopian can change his skin, and the leopard his spots, so you can do good, when you have learned evil."

According to this way, it is said that a blinded man cannot believe; and the Evangelist means to say that they could not believe because they were blinded, as Isaiah had foretold — not that Isaiah's prediction was the cause, but rather their own malice and the divine judgment, namely the judgment of abandonment. Augustine: "God blinds and hardens by abandoning, not by assisting; which can happen by a hidden judgment, yet not an unjust one."

In this instance the prophet Isaiah is not quoted as saying that "God" blinded the people." However, it is likely that someone else did the blinding in order that the Jews should not convert and find healing. But, even though we should accept the supposition that God blinded them, it must be understood that God allowed them to suffer blinding at the hands of the devil as a result of their evil character.

(Hom. lxviii) For He does not leave us, except we wish Him, as He saith in Hosea, Seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children. (Hos. 4:6) Whereby it is plain that we begin to forsake first, and are the cause of our own perdition. For as it is not the fault of the sun, that it hurts weak eyes, so neither is God to blame for punishing those who do not attend to His words.

Through them, to wit, had "the heart of the People been made thick, lest they should see with the eyes, and hear with the ears, and understand with a heart" obstructed by the "fats" of which He had expressly forbidden the eating, teaching man not to be studious of the stomach.

When you hear that God blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, do not think that He simply makes some good and others evil (away with such a thought!), but by the complete blinding understand the abandonment by God. I will explain with an example. Suppose someone is moderate in wickedness. God, it seems, is with him, because there is hope that such a person will turn back. But when a person plunges into the depths of wickedness, then God abandons him on account of his evil will. Of a person who has been deprived of the Divine light and walks in the darkness of sin, it is said that he walks as one who is blind; the absence of the Divine word, which softens the hearts of those who receive it, is called hardening of the heart. Already blinded is the one who completely refuses to receive the ray of Divine light, and hardened is the one who does not wish to hear the teaching that softens the heart, and God's withdrawal completely blinds and darkens him. So when you hear that God blinds, understand it in this way: He blinds because He is not present. For if God were present with a person, the person would not have become blind. If the sun were there, there would be no darkness. But now the sun produces night. In what way? By setting. So too God makes people blind by withdrawing from them. And He withdraws from them on account of their wickedness, and from that point on they, like blind men, sin irretrievably and fall incorrigibly.

With these distinctions in mind, let us consider the words of this prophecy. It is found in Isaiah (6:10), not in these exact words, but with the same meaning. Three things are mentioned here: first, the hardening and blinding of the Jews; secondly, the effect of each of these; thirdly, their end.

In regard to the first, note that our Lord brought people to the faith in two ways, by his miracles and his teaching. And so he rebukes them on both points: "If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin" (15:24); and again in (15:22): "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin." For they had derided both.

Insofar as they did not give due consideration to Christ's miracles, he says, he has blinded their eyes, that is, the eyes of their hearts, about which we read: "Having the eyes of your hearts enlightened" (Eph 1:18). For they should have understood that such miracles could only be done by divine power: "You see many things, but do not observe them" (Is 42:20); and again, "Who is blind but my servant? Or deaf, except he to whom I have sent my messengers?" (Is 42:19).

Because they were not moved by the teaching of Christ, he adds, and hardened their heart. That is very hard which is not melted by intense heat nor broken by divine blows. Now the words of Christ are "like fire, and like a hammer which breaks the rock in pieces" (Jer 23:29). Fire, indeed, because they inflame through love; and like a hammer because they terrify when they threaten, and break one by the revelation of the truth. And still the hearts of the Jews paid no attention to the words of Christ. Thus it is obvious that they were hardened: "His heart is hard as a stone" (Job 41:24); "He has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills" (Rom 9:18).

The effect of their becoming blind is mentioned when he says, lest they should see with their eyes, that is, their spiritual eyes, and perceive the divinity of Christ: "They have eyes, but do not see" (Ps 115:5). In contrast, Luke says: "Blessed are the eyes which see what you see!" (Lk 10:23). The effect of their becoming hard of heart is mentioned when he says, lest they should perceive, understand, with their heart: "Because no one understands, they will perish forever" (Job 4:20); "He would not understand so that he might act well" (Ps 35:4). Here it should be noted that when he says, "lest they should see with their eyes and perceive with their heart," that is, "that they should not see with their eyes and perceive with their heart," the "that" does not indicate a cause, but merely the sequence of events.

The end of their becoming blind and hard in heart is given when he says, and turn for me to heal them. This can be understood in two ways, as Augustine says in his work, On Gospel Questions. In one way, so that both parts are negative, and then the meaning would be: "and they do not turn to me and I do not heal them." For the way of salvation from sin is to turn to God: "Restore us to thyself, O Lord, that we may be restored! Renew our days of old!" (Lam 5:21). But to those who prove themselves unworthy to have their sins forgiven, God does not offer the gifts by which they might turn to him and be healed, as is obvious in the case of the non-chosen.

The other interpretation is to regard only the first part as negative and then the meaning would be: they were blinded and hardened so they should not see or understand for a time, and so not seeing or understanding, that is, not believing in Christ, they would put him to death, but afterwards they would repent and turn to God and be healed. For now and then God permits us to fall into sin so that being humbled we may arise firmer in holiness.

Each of these interpretations is verified in the case of some of the Jews: the first one in those who persisted to the end in their unbelief, and the second one in those who turned to Christ after his passion, namely, those with remorse in their hearts at the words of Peter, and who said to the apostles: "Brethren, what shall we do?" as we read in the Acts (2:37).

"These things said Isaiah, when he saw His glory, and spake of Him." What Isaiah saw, and how it refers to Christ the Lord, are to be read and learned in his book. For he saw Him, not as He is, but in some symbolical way to suit the form that the vision of the prophet had itself to assume. For Moses likewise saw Him, and yet we find him saying to Him whom he saw, "If I have found grace in Thy sight, show me now Thyself, that I may clearly see Thee;" for he saw Him not as He is. But the time when this shall yet be our experience, that same Saint John the Evangelist tells us in his Epistle: "Dearly beloved, [now] are we the sons of God; and it hath not yet become manifest what we shall be: because we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is." He might have said "for we shall see Him," without adding "as He is;" but because he knew that He was seen of some of the fathers and prophets, but not as He is, therefore after saying "we shall see Him," he added "as He is." And be not deceived, brethren, by any of those who assert that the Father is invisible, and the Son visible. This assertion is made by those who think that the latter is a creature, and whose understanding runs not in harmony with the words, "I and my Father one." Accordingly, as respects the form of God wherein He is equal with the Father, the Son also is invisible: but, in order to be seen of men, He assumed the form of a servant, and being made in the likeness of men, became visible to man. He showed Himself, therefore, even before His incarnation, to the eyes of men, as it pleased Him, in the creature-form at His command, but not as He is. Let us be purifying our hearts by faith, that we may be prepared for that ineffable and, so to speak, invisible vision. For "blessed are the pure in heart; for they shall see God."

(Tr. liii. 11) These things said Esaias, when he saw His glory, and spake of Him. He saw Him not really, but figuratively, in prophetic vision. Be not deceived by those who say that the Father is invisible, the Son visible, making the Son a creature. For in the form of God, in which He is equal to the Father, the Son also is invisible; though He took upon Him the form of a servant, that He might be seen by men. Before His incarnation too, He made Himself visible at times to human eyes; but visible through the medium of created matter, not visible as He is.

Isaiah says, in chapter six, in a vision which was the root of all his other visions: "I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne." And immediately there follows upon this the blinding of the Jews and the enlightenment of the Gentiles. Hence, John says: When he saw the Lord, Isaiah said again: "He has blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts." Hence the enlightenment of the Gentiles became the blinding of the Jews.

These things Isaiah said, when he saw his glory and spoke of him; Isaiah 6, where it is said that "he saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and the whole earth was full of his majesty."

In approaching the account of his coming to humanity, the prophecy before us tells first of his divine kingdom, in which it says that the prophet saw him sitting on a throne high and exalted. This is that throne that is mentioned in the psalm of the Beloved. … John the Evangelist supports my interpretation of this passage, when he quotes the words of Isaiah, where it is said, "For this people's heart has become fat, and their ears are dull of hearing, and they have closed their eyes," referring them to Christ, saying, "This is what Isaiah said when he saw his glory and bore witness of him." The prophet then seeing our Savior sitting on his Father's throne in the divine and glorious kingdom, and moved by the Holy Spirit and being about to describe next his coming among humanity and his birth of a Virgin, foretells that his knowledge and praise would be over all the earth.

(Hom. lxviii. 2) His glory means the vision of Him sitting on His lofty throne: I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne. Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? (Is. 6:1)

"These things said Isaiah, when he saw His glory." Whose? The Son's. Although the prophet, judging by the connection of the speech, seems to have seen the glory of the Father, the evangelist says here that Isaiah saw the glory of the Son, and the apostle Paul says that he saw the glory of the Spirit (Acts 28:25). Truly the glory of the Holy Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—is one. "Isaiah," He says, "saw His glory": the smoke that appeared to him, the seraphim, the coals, the altar, the throne (Isa. 6:1–7). So Isaiah saw this glory and spoke of Him, that is, of the Son. What did he say of Him? That which was said above, that He blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts.

Then the Evangelist shows that these words of Isaiah apply here. He says, Isaiah said this because he saw his glory, the glory of God. For when he saw the glory of God he saw at the same time that the Jews would be blinded, as is clear from, "I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne" (Is 6:1), followed by, "Blind the heart of this people and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and be converted, and I heal them" (Is 6:10). And because it is fitting that one should testify about what he has seen - as we read in 1 John (1:1) - he adds, and spoke of him, that is, of Christ, whose glory he saw: "To him all the prophets bear witness" (Acts 10:43); "Which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures, the gospel concerning his Son" (Rom 1:2).

We read that Isaiah saw and said these things. As to the first, we should avoid the error of the Arians, who say that the Father alone is invisible to every creature, but that the Son was seen in the visions of the Old Testament. But since it is stated that "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (14:9), it is obvious that the Father and the Son are visible in one and the same way. And so Isaiah, seeing the glory of the Son, also saw the glory of the Father, and indeed of the entire Trinity, which is one God, seated upon a high throne before whom the seraphim cry out: Holy, Holy, Holy! This does not mean that Isaiah saw the essence of the Trinity; rather in an imaginary vision, with understanding, he expressed certain signs of this majesty, according to the saying in Numbers (12:6): "If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream."

As to the second thing, that Isaiah spoke of him: this excludes the error of the Manicheans, who said that there were no prophecies about Christ in the Old Testament, as Augustine reports to us in his book Against Faustus; and it excludes the error of Theodore of Mopsuestia, who said that all the prophecies of the Old Testament bore on some current event, but the apostles and evangelists appropriated them to the life of Christ, like things said about one event can be appropriated to another event. But all this is excluded by the statement, and spoke of him, just as Christ said of Moses that "he wrote of me" (5:46).

Nevertheless, among the chief rulers also many believed on Him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue. For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. The praise of God is publicly to confess Christ: the praise of men is to glory in earthly things.

Nevertheless, from among the rulers. Here the second point is touched upon, namely the election of certain ones: therefore he speaks adversatively: although it was said that they did not believe, nevertheless many of the rulers believed in him: Romans 11: "At this time a remnant according to the election of grace has been saved." But yet they were not perfect in faith; on account of which he adds: But on account of the Pharisees they did not confess, lest they be cast out of the synagogue: above, chapter 9: "For the Jews had already conspired that if anyone should confess him to be the Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue." And this indeed they feared as being imperfect.

[On how the desire to be admitted to an "Inner Ring" of insiders leads otherwise decent men into wrongdoing, not by obvious temptation but by the fear of being excluded from the company whose approval they crave]

To nine out of ten of you the choice which could lead to scoundrelism will come, when it does come, in no very dramatic colours. Obviously bad men, obviously threatening or bribing, will almost certainly not appear. Over a drink or a cup of coffee, disguised as a triviality and sandwiched between two jokes, from the lips of a man, or woman, whom you have recently been getting to know rather better and whom you hope to know better still—just at the moment when you are most anxious not to appear crude, or naif or a prig—the hint will come. It will be the hint of something which is not quite in accordance with the technical rules of fair play: something which the public, the ignorant, romantic public, would never understand: something which even the outsiders in your own profession are apt to make a fuss about: but something, says your new friend, which "we"—and at the word "we" you try not to blush for mere pleasure—something "we always do". And you will be drawn in, if you are drawn in, not by desire for gain or ease, but simply because at that moment, when the cup was so near your lips, you cannot bear to be thrust back again into the cold outer world. It would be so terrible to see the other man's face—that genial, confidential, delightfully sophisticated face—turn suddenly cold and contemptuous, to know that you had been tried for the Inner Ring and rejected. And then, if you are drawn in, next week it will be something a little further from the rules, and next year something further still, but all in the jolliest, friendliest spirit. It may end in a crash, a scandal, and penal servitude: it may end in millions, a peerage and giving the prizes at your old school. But you will be a scoundrel. Of all passions the passion for the Inner Ring is most skilful in making a man who is not yet a very bad man do very bad things.

Now, however, when constrained by the signs to believe and no longer daring to gainsay the Lord, they fail of eternal life through the persistence of their own abominable perversity in esteeming their position in the eyes of men higher than their relationship to God, and in being slaves of a temporal glory, deeming it an intolerable loss to fail of honour at the hands of the Pharisees. Forasmuch therefore as this was what hindered them from believing, hear what the Christ says...

It is necessary for us to avoid alike all the passions which corrupt the soul, but most especially those, which from themselves generate numerous sins. I mean such as the love of money. It is in truth of itself a dreadful malady, but it becomes much more grievous, because it is the root and mother of all mischiefs. Such also is vainglory. See, for instance, how these men were broken off from the faith through their love of honor. "Many," it saith, "of the chief rulers also believed on Him, but because of the Jews they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue." As He said also to them before, "How can ye believe which receive honor one of another, and seek not the honor that cometh from God only?" (c. v. 44.) So then they were not rulers, but slaves in the utmost slavery. However, this fear was afterwards done away, for nowhere during the time of the Apostles do we find them possessed by this feeling, since in their time both rulers and priests believed. The grace of the Spirit having come, made them all firmer than adamant.

Then the Evangelist said that many among the authorities who believed in him hid their opinion about him because of the Pharisees, because they feared they might lose their privileges and because they valued the glory of people more than the glory of God. What did our Lord say? While some believed, others did not even accept the accomplished miracles, others only came to know the truth through the miracles but hid their opinion because of their fear of the Pharisees as they pursued human glory.

The Evangelist notes that many even of the rulers believed in Him, showing that the Pharisees lied in this also, when they said: "Have any of the rulers believed in Him?" (John 7:48). For behold, many even of the rulers believed, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess it.

Above, the Evangelist described the failing of those who did not believe at all; here he explains the failing of those who believed in secret, because they were timid, faint-hearted. First, he mentions their dignity; secondly, their failing; and thirdly, he suggests the root of this failing (v 43).

The dignity of those who believed in secret was great, for they were the authorities, and on this point he says, many even of the authorities believed in him. He is saying in effect: I said that although Jesus had done so many signs, still they did not believe in him; and although this was true for the majority, yet there were some who did believe in him, because many even of the authorities, of the people, believed in him. One of these was Nicodemus, who came to Jesus by night, as was said (c 3). Thus the words of the Psalm (47:9) were fulfilled: "The princes of the peoples gather as their people of the God of Abraham"; and the statement of the Pharisees is proved false: "Have any of the authorities or of the Pharisees believed in him?" (7:48).

The failing of these authorities is timidity, faint-heartedness; thus he says, but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it. For as stated above, the Pharisees "agreed that if any one should confess him to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue" (9:22). So, although they believed with their hearts, they did not profess him with their lips. Their faith, therefore, was insufficient, for as is said in Romans (10:10): "For a man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved." "Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, of him will the Son of man be ashamed" (Lk 9:26).

When we are persecuted, let us not think it strange; let us not love the present world, nor the praises which come from men, nor the glory and honour of rulers, according as some of the Jews wondered at the mighty works of our Lord, yet did not believe on Him, for fear of the high priests and the rest of the rulers: "For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." But now, by confessing a good confession, we not only save ourselves, but we confirm those who are newly illuminated, and strengthen the faith of the catechumens.

"Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on Him; but, because of the Pharisees, they did not confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: for they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God." See how the evangelist marked and disapproved of some, who yet, he said, believed on Him: who, if ever they did advance through this gateway of faith, would thereby also overcome that love of human glory which had been overcome by the apostle, when he said, "God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." For to this end also did the Lord Himself, when derided by the madness of human pride and impiety, fix His cross on the foreheads of those who believed on Him, on that which is in a manner the abode of modesty, that faith may learn not to blush at His name, and love the glory of God more than the glory of men.

(Tr. liii. 13) As their faith grew, their love of human praise grew still more, and outstripped it.

For they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God: and they acted foolishly, according to what is said in 1 Maccabees 2: "Do not fear the words of a sinful man, for his glory is dung and worms; today he is exalted, and tomorrow he shall not be found"; the Psalm: "He has scattered the bones of those who please men," etc.; Galatians 1: "Do I seek to please men? If I still pleased men, I would not be a servant of Christ."

"For they loved the praise of men." Christ had said this to them before as well: "How can you believe, when you receive glory from men, and do not seek the glory that is from the only God?" (Jn. 5:44) So the Evangelist shows that what Christ had foretold them came to pass. Truly, they were not rulers but slaves, and the most base slaves at that. From this we learn that whoever loves glory is a slave and is dishonorable.

The root of their failing is vanity, vainglory; so he says, for they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God. By confessing Christ publicly they would have lost the glory of men, but won the glory of God. But they chose rather to be deprived of the glory of God than the glory of men: "How can you believe, who receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?" (5:44). "If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ" (Gal 1:10).