Monday of the 4th Sunday of Pascha

He is called Simon, son of John, John being his natural father. But mystically, Simon is obedience, John grace, a name well befitting him who was so obedient to God's grace, that he loved our Lord more ardently than any of the others. Such virtue arising from divine gift, not mere human will.

It is Peter, chosen by the Lord himself to feed his flock, who merits three times to hear the words "Feed my little lambs; feed my lambs; feed my sheep." And so, by feeding well the flock of Christ with the food of faith, he effaced the sin of his former fall. For this reason he is admonished three times to feed the flock. He is asked three times whether he loves the Lord in order that he may confess him three times whom he had denied three times before his crucifixion.

O pastors! Imitate that diligent pastor, the chief of the whole flock, who cared so greatly for his flock. He brought near those who were far away. He brought back the wanderers. He visited the sick. He strengthened the weak. He bound up the broken. He guarded those who were well fed. He gave himself up for the sake of the sheep. He chose and instructed excellent leaders, and committed the sheep into their hands and gave them authority over all his flock. For he said to Simon Cephas, "Feed my sheep and my lambs and my ewes." So Simon fed his sheep and fulfilled his calling and handed over the flock to you and departed. And so you also must feed and guide them well. For the pastor who cares for his sheep engages in no other pursuit along with that. He does not make a vineyard, or plant gardens, or fall into the troubles of this world. Never have we seen a pastor who left his sheep in the wilderness and became a merchant, or one who left his flock to wander and became a husbandman. But if he deserts his flock and does these things, he thereby hands over his flock to the wolves.

Christ rose again in the flesh, and Peter rose in the spirit because, when Christ died in his passion, Peter died by his denial. Christ the Lord was raised from the dead, and out of his love he raised Peter. He questioned him about the love he was confessing and entrusted him with his sheep. After all, what benefit could Peter confer on Christ by the mere fact of his loving Christ? If Christ loves you, it is to your advantage, not Christ's. And if you love Christ, it is to your advantage, not Christ's. And yet Christ the Lord wanted to indicate how people ought to show that they love Christ. And he made it plain enough by entrusting him with his sheep. "Do you love me?" "I do." "Feed my sheep." All this once, all this a second time, all this a third time. Peter made no other reply than that he loved him. The Lord asked no other question but whether he loved him. When Peter answered, our Lord did nothing else but entrust his sheep to him.

He is being armed for weightier and greater matters. He is told "Feed my sheep," a task that was certainly going to mean danger for the flesh but glory for the spirit. Just think how much he was going to suffer for the name of Christ by feeding the sheep of Christ! "Feed my sheep, feed my lambs." I mean, if you love me, what present are you going to give me? The prince of pastors made him a pastor so that Peter would feed Christ's sheep, not his own.…"Feed my sheep." Why? Because you love me, because you are devoted to me, I am committing my sheep to you. Feed them, but remember they are mine. Heretical leaders, though, wish to make their own the sheep that are really Christ's. All the same, they are forced … to set the stamp of Christ on them. They may make them their own private flock, but they still have to register them in the Lord's name.

Feed "my" sheep; he did not say "yours," did he? Feed, good servant, the Lord's sheep that bear the Lord's brand. After all, was Paul crucified for you, or were you baptized in the name of Peter and Paul? So feed his sheep, washed in his baptism, sealed in his name, redeemed with his blood. "Feed," he says, "my sheep."

"So when they had dined, He saith to Simon Peter, Simon, [son] of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto Him, Yea, Lord; Thou knowest that I love Thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs." To the threefold denial there is now appended a threefold confession, that his tongue may not yield a feebler service to love than to fear, and imminent death may not appear to have elicited more from the lips than present life. Let it be the office of love to feed the Lord's flock, if it was the signal of fear to deny the Shepherd. Those who have this purpose in feeding the flock of Christ, that they may have them as their own, and not as Christ's, are convicted of loving themselves, and not Christ, from the desire either of boasting, or wielding power, or acquiring gain, and not from the love of obeying, serving, and pleasing God. Against such, therefore, there stands as a wakeful sentinel this thrice inculcated utterance of Christ, of whom the apostle complains that they seek their own, not the things that are Jesus Christ's. For what else mean the words, "Lovest thou me? Feed my sheep," than if it were said, If thou lovest me, think not of feeding thyself, but feed my sheep as mine, and not as thine own; seek my glory in them, and not thine own; my dominion, and not thine; my gain, and not thine; lest thou be found in the fellowship of those who belong to the perilous times, lovers of their own selves, and all else that is joined on to this beginning of evils?

We have it also demonstrated here that love and liking are one and the same thing; for the Lord also in the last question said not Diligis me? but, Amas me? Let us, then, love not ourselves, but Him; and in feeding His sheep, let us be seeking the things which are His, not the things which are our own. For in some inexplicable way, I know not what, every one that loveth himself, and not God, loveth not himself; and whoever loveth God, and not himself, he it is that loveth himself. For he that cannot live by himself will certainly die by loving himself; he therefore loveth not himself who loves himself to his own loss of life. But when He is loved by whom life is preserved, a man by not loving himself only loveth the more, when it is for this reason that he loveth not himself [namely] that he may love Him by whom he lives.

Our Lord asked this, knowing it: He knew that Peter not only loved Him, but loved Him more than all the rest.

While our Lord was being condemned to death, he feared, and denied Him. But by His resurrection Christ implanted love in his heart, and drove away fear. Peter denied, because he feared to die: but when our Lord was risen from the dead, and by His death destroyed death, what should he fear? He saith unto Him, Yea, Lord; Thou knowest that I love Thee. On this confession of his love, our Lord commends His sheep to him: He saith unto him, Feed My lambs: as if there were no way of Peter's showing his love for Him, but by being a faithful shepherd, under the chief Shepherd.

(Tract. cxxii) Well doth He say to Peter, Lovest thou Me (ἀγαπᾶς diligis), and Peter answer, Amo Te (φελῶ amo), and our Lord replies again, Feed My lambs. Whereby, it appears that amor and dilectio are the same thing: especially as our Lord the third time He speaks does not say, Diligis Me, but Amas Me. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me? A third time our Lord asks Peter whether he loves Him. Three confessions are made to answer to the three denials; that the tongue might show as much love as it had fear, and life gained draw out the voice as much as death threatened.

(Tract. cxxiii) They who feed Christ's sheep, as if they were their own, not Christ's, show plainly that they love themselves, not Christ; that they are moved by lust of glory, power, gain, not by the love of obeying, ministering, pleasing God. Let us love therefore, not ourselves, but Him, and in feeding His sheep, seek not our own, but the things which are His. For whoso loveth himself, not God, loveth not himself: man that cannot live of himself, must die by loving himself; and he cannot love himself, who loves himself to his own destruction. Whereas when He by Whom we live is loved, we love ourselves the more, because we do not love ourselves; because we do not love ourselves in order that we may love Him by Whom we live.

(Serm. Pass.) But unfaithful servants arose, who divided Christ's flock, and handed down the division to their successors: and you hear them say, Those sheep are mine, what seekest thou with my sheep, I will not let thee come to my sheep. If we call our sheep ours, as they call them theirs, Christ hath lost His sheep.

When therefore they had dined. It should be noted that during the meal he did not ask about love, because, as is said in Sirach chapter six, "there is a friend who is a companion at table, and he will not remain in the day of necessity." But afterward he asks: Jesus says to Simon Peter: Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these? Therefore he asks about love, because he does not wish to entrust his flock except to one who loves; therefore about greater love, because he wishes to entrust it to one who loves more. Hence Gregory: "He who does not have charity ought by no means to undertake the office of preaching"; certainly much less the office of prelacy, because, as is said in John chapter ten, "the good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep."

He says to him: Yes, Lord. Here is set forth Peter's response, in which he responds that he loves, but not that he loves more, because he did not know the love of the others. Hence Augustine: "That Peter responds, I love you, and did not add more than these: he responded what he knew about himself; for he could not know how much he was loved by another, because he could not see the heart of another." You know that I love you: in this response Peter shows that he does not respond in flattery, but truly. Hence Chrysostom: "He calls as witness him who knows hidden things." So Jeremiah invoked him, in the seventeenth chapter: "I have not desired the day of man, you know."

He says to him. Here is noted after the response the exhortation to action: because "the proof of love is the display of works"; therefore he says: Feed my lambs: in which the wondrous love of Christ for his sheep is expressed, because he showed this above all other things as a sign of his love: and this indeed Peter fulfilled and urged to be fulfilled, 1 Peter 5: "Elders, feed the flock of God which is among you," etc.

It is asked: since the other Apostles stood around, who loved the Lord, why was only Peter questioned about love? There is one response: because the care of the flock was to be specially entrusted to him among the others, therefore he is specially asked about his love. Hence Chrysostom: "Peter was the foremost of the Apostles and the mouth of the disciples and the head of the college"; therefore, passing over and bypassing the others, he speaks to him about such things. — Another reason can also be assigned: because Peter had notably denied him, and therefore seemed not to be worthy to be placed before the other Apostles; therefore the Lord asks, so that he might show his charity excelling above the rest, and might confirm the pastoral office which he had given.

It is asked: since Peter could not answer this question: Do you love me more than these? because he did not know about the others, why does the Lord ask? I respond: It must be said that the Lord asks this in order to show his excellence in the asking and his correction in the answering; hence Augustine: "That Peter loved the Lord more than the others is evidently apparent where, questioning him, he says: Do you love me more than these? Which indeed he knew, and yet he was asking, so that we too might know his love toward the Lord." And Peter's correction is shown in this, that he does not dare to place himself before the others, as above before the passion, when he said: "Even if all shall be scandalized in you, yet not I."

If any one consider and examine these things, there is no need for lengthened discussion and arguments. There is easy proof for faith in a short summary of the truth. The Lord speaks to Peter, saying, "I say unto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." And again to the same He says, after His resurrection, "Feed nay sheep." And although to all the apostles, after His resurrection, He gives an equal power, and says, "As the Father hath sent me, even so send I you: Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they shall be remitted unto him; and whose soever sins ye retain, they shall be retained; " yet, that He might set forth unity, He arranged by His authority the origin of that unity, as beginning from one. Assuredly the rest of the apostles were also the same as was Peter, endowed with a like partnership both of honour and power; but the beginning proceeds from unity. Which one Church, also, the Holy Spirit in the Song of Songs designated in the person of our Lord, and says, "My dove, my spotless one, is but one. She is the only one of her mother, elect of her that bare her." Does he who does not hold this unity of the Church think that he holds the faith? Does he who strives against and resists the Church trust that he is in the Church, when moreover the blessed Apostle Paul teaches the same thing, and sets forth the sacrament of unity, saying, "There is one body and one spirit, one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God?"

We have been informed by Crementius the sub-deacon, who came to us from you, that the blessed father Cyprian has for a certain reason withdrawn; "in doing which he acted quite rightly, because he is a person of eminence, and because a conflict is impending," which God has allowed in the world, for the sake of cooperating with His servants in their struggle against the adversary, and was, moreover, willing that this conflict should show to angels and to men that the victor shall be crowned, while the vanquished shall in himself receive the doom which has been made manifest to us. Since, moreover, it devolves upon us who appear to be placed on high, in the place of a shepherd, to keep watch over the flock; if we be found neglectful, it will be said to us, as it was said to our predecessors also, who in such wise negligent had been placed in charge, that "we have not sought for that which was lost, and have not corrected the wanderer, and have not bound up that which was broken, but have eaten their milk, and been clothed with their wool; " and then also the Lord Himself, fulfilling what had been written in the law and the prophets, teaches, saying, "I am the good shepherd, who lay down my life for the sheep. But the hireling, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth, and the wolf scatter-eth them." To Simon, too, He speaks thus: "Lovest thou me? He answered, I do love Thee. He saith to him, Feed my sheep." We know that this saying arose out of the very circumstance of his withdrawal, and the rest of the disciples did likewise.

Peter started to reach Jesus before the rest, disdaining, as it appears, to go by boat, because of the incomparable fervour and admirable zeal of his love towards Christ. Therefore He comes first to land, and draws up the net; for he was always an impressionable man, easily excited to enthusiasm both in speech and action. Therefore, also, he first made confession of faith when the Saviour put to them the inquiry in the parts of Caesarea Philippi, saying: Who do men say that I the Son of Man am? And of the other disciples some said Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. But when Christ put the further question to them: But Who say ye that I am? Peter took the lead, and becoming spokesman for the rest, hastened to reply: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Moreover, when the band of soldiers came, together with the officers of the Jews, to take Jesus away to the rulers, the rest all left Him and fled, but Peter struck off Malchus' ear with a sword. For he thought it right by every means in his power to defend his Master, though the attack that he made was in fact altogether displeasing to Him. As, therefore, he came more impetuously than the rest, Christ puts to him the question whether he loved Him more than they, and repeated it three times; and Peter answers in the affirmative, and confesses his love for Him, saying that Christ Himself was a witness to his state of mind. And, after each confession, he heard Christ telling him in different words to take thought of His sheep, as He calls mankind in the parable.

And I think (for I say that we ought to search out the hidden meaning that is here implied) that these words were not written without a purpose, but the saying is pregnant with meaning, and the sense of the passage contains something more than meets the eye. May not someone reasonably ask, Why is it that Christ only asks Simon, though the other disciples were present? And what is the meaning of the words, Feed My lambs, and the like? We reply, that the inspired Peter had indeed already been elected, together with the other disciples, to be an Apostle of God (for our Lord Jesus Christ Himself named them Apostles, according to the Scripture), but, when the events connected with the plot of the Jews against Him came to pass, his fall came betwixt; for the inspired Peter was seized with uncontrollable fear, and thrice denied the Lord. Christ succours His erring disciple, and elicits by divers questions his thrice-repeated confession, counterbalancing, as it were, his error thereby, and making his recovery as signal as his fall. For a transgression which was verbal, and only in mere words supplied ground of accusation against him, could surely be wiped out in the same fashion as it was committed. He requires him to say whether he loved Him more than the rest. For in truth, as he had enjoyed a greater measure of forgiveness, and received from a more bountiful Hand the remission of his transgression, surely he would be likely to feel greater love than the rest, and requite his Benefactor with the extremity of affection. For although all the holy disciples alike betook themselves to flight, the inhumanity of the Jews inspiring them with a terror that they could not overcome, and the ferocity of the soldiers threatening them with cruel death when they came to take Jesus, still Peter's transgression by his thrice-repeated denial was special and peculiar to him.

Therefore, as he had received a greater measure of forgiveness than the rest, he is asked to tell Christ whether he loved Him more; for, as the Saviour Himself said, he to whom most is forgiven will also love much. Herein, also, is a type given to the. Churches, that they ought thrice to ask for a confession of Christ from those who have chosen to love Him by coming to Him in Holy Baptism. And, by dwelling on this passage, instructors in religion may arrive at the knowledge that they cannot please the Chief Shepherd, that is Christ, unless they take thought for the health of the sheep of His fold, and their continuance in well-being. Such was the inspired Paul, who shared the infirmities of his weak brethren, and called those who through him believed, and chose to gain repute by the glory of their deeds, the boast, and joy, and crown of his apostleship. For he knew that this was the visible fruit of love for Christ. And this, if he reason well and justly, any one may perceive. For if He died for us, surely He must esteem the salvation and life of us all as deserving of all care. And if they who sin against the brethren, and wound their conscience when it is weak, in truth sin against Christ; surely it is true to say, that they are doing the Lord Himself service who take, as it were, by the hand the mind of those who have been admitted to the faith, and who are expected to be called to perfection therein, and are eager to stablish them firmly in the faith, by every help that they can offer. Therefore, by his thrice-repeated confession the thrice-repeated denial of the blessed Peter was done away, and by the saying of our Lord, "Feed my lambs," we must understand a renewal as it were of the apostleship, already given unto him, washing away the disgrace of his fall that came betwixt, and obliterating his faint-heartedness, that arose from human infirmity.

There are indeed many other things which are able to give us boldness towards God, and to show us bright and approved, but that which most of all brings good will from on high, is tender care for our neighbor. Which therefore Christ requireth of Peter. And why, having passed by the others, doth He speak with Peter on these matters? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the leader of the band; on this account also Paul went up upon a time to enquire of him rather than the others. And at the same time to show him that he must now be of good cheer, since the denial was done away, Jesus putteth into his hands the chief authority among the brethren; and He bringeth not forward the denial, nor reproacheth him with what had taken place, but saith, "If thou lovest Me, preside over thy brethren, and the warm love which thou didst ever manifest, and in which thou didst rejoice, show thou now; and the life which thou saidst thou wouldest lay down for Me, now give for My sheep."

There are indeed many other things which are able to give us boldness towards God, and to show us bright and approved, but that which most of all brings good will from on high, is tender care for our neighbor. Which therefore Christ requireth of Peter.

(Hom. lxxxviii. 1) That which most of all attracts the Divine love is care and love for our neighbour. Our Lord passing by the rest, addresses this command to Peter: he being the chief of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, and head of the college. Our Lord remembers no more his sin in denying Him, or brings that as a charge against him, but commits to him at once the superintendence over his brethren. If thou lovest Me, have rule over thy brethren, show forth that love which thou hast evidenced throughout, and that life which thou saidst thou wouldest lay down for Me, lay down for the sheep. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me? He saith unto Him, Yea, Lord; Thou knowest that I love Thee.

And our Lord also called the faithful ones of His pastures by names in which simplicity is indicated: "If thou lovest Me", He said to Simon, the chief of His disciples, "feed My sheep, and My lambs, and My ewes." And as He was called symbolically by the word of the prophecy, "lamb", and "sheep", and John also called Him, "The Lamb of God", even so did He call the disciples of His word by the names which indicate simpleness. And He did this that when all believers heard what names were given to them by the Shepherd they might, like sheep, and lambs, and ewes, be incited to abide in all simpleness, and might not go forth from the law of simplicity, and that like these innocent animals, which are led to death, and are brought to slaughter, and are bound for shearing, and are hunted by wild beasts, they might neither cry out nor complain, but remain in quietness and in the innocency of their nature.

Look to me, Peter, on how you offer instruction. Remembering your own fall, sympathize with all. Mindful of that maiden who caused your own downfall, do not be harsh. If conceit attacks you, listen again to the sound of the rooster's crow, And remember the tears with whose streams I washed you, I who alone know what is in your heart. Peter, do you love me? Do what I say, feed my flock, and love those whom I love, Sympathizing with sinners and remembering the compassion I had for you, since I received you after you denied me three times. You have a thief as gatekeeper of paradise to give you courage. Send him those whom you wish. Because of you, Adam turned to me, Crying, "O Creator offer me The robber as gatekeeper, and Cephas as keeper of the keys. You who alone know what is in the heart."

Jesus promoted Peter and placed him as the head of the lambs of his herd and said, "Feed my lambs," that is, all those who believe in me and who, because they were instructed only recently, are weaker. And for this reason, it is necessary that you carry their burden, and protect them, and comfort them in their weakness and nourish them with the grace that was given to you.

Since the dinner had a purpose for Him, He entrusts to Peter the care of the sheep of the whole world, entrusting the care not to anyone else but to him, first, because he was the chosen one from among all and was the mouthpiece of the entire company of the apostles; then in order to show that he must have boldness, since his denial has been atoned for. He does not bring up the denial, does not reproach him for it, but says: "If you love Me, take care of the brethren and prove now that ardent love for Me of which you spoke, saying that you were ready even to die for Me."

The dinner being ended, He commits to Peter the superintendence over the sheep of the world, not to the others: So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me more than these?

Thence is taken the custom of threefold confession in baptism.

There is a difference perhaps between lambs and sheep. The lambs are those just initiated, the sheep are the perfected.

The Evangelist just showed what the Lord did for the disciples in general; here he shows him dealing with his two especially loved disciples: first, what he did for Peter; and how he dealt with John (v 20). He does two things with the first: first, he lays on Peter the pastoral office; secondly, he predicts that he will be martyred (v 18).

He imposes the pastoral office on Peter only after an examination. Thus, those who are to be raised to this office are first examined, "Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands" (1 Tim 5:22). Christ examined him three times, and so this part is divided into three parts. In the first part we see our Lord's question (v 15); Peter's answer; and the imposition of the office (v 15). Looking at the first, we can consider three things: the time of the examination; the tenor of the conversation; and on what Peter was examined.

The order of this event is given as When they had finished the meal. This signifies the spiritual meal by which the soul is refreshed with spiritual gifts, even when it is united to the body: "I will come in to him and eat with him" (Rev 3:20). Therefore it is appropriate that one who is raised to this office be already refreshed with this joyous meal. Otherwise, how could he refresh the hungry ones that come to him: "I will feast the soul of the priests with abundance" (Jer 31:14), with that abundance mentioned in Psalm 63 (v 5): "My soul is feasted as with marrow and fat."

The tenor of the conversation is seen when he says, Jesus said to Simon Peter. Three things are given here which are necessary for a prelate. First, obedience, when he says, Simon, which means obedient. A prelate needs to be obedient because one who does not know how to obey superiors does not know how to govern inferiors: "An obedient man will speak of victory" (Prv 21:28). Secondly, a prelate needs knowledge, indicated by Peter, which means understanding. A prelate needs understanding for he is the appointed watchman, and one who is blind is a poor watchman: "His watchmen are blind" (Is 56:10); "Because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me" (Hos 4:6). Thirdly, a prelate needs grace, for he says son of John. Prelates need grace because if they do not have grace they do not have anything: "By the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor 15:10); "And when they perceived the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship" (Gal 2:9).

The questions are about love; and Jesus asks, Do you love me more than these? This was a suitable question, for Peter had previously fallen, as we saw before, and it was not appropriate that he be preferred to the others until his sin was forgiven ‑ which is only brought about by charity: "Love covers a multitude of sins" (1 Pet 4:8); "Love covers all offenses" (Prv 10:12). So it was fitting that his charity be made known by this questioning, not indeed to him who looks into the depths of our hearts, but to others. So Christ said, but not as one who did not already know, Do you love me more than these? Now we read that "perfect love casts out fear" (1 Jn 4:18). Thus it was that when our Lord was about to die, Peter was afraid and denied him; but the risen Lord restored love and banished his fear. So Peter, who before had denied Christ because he was afraid to die, now, after our Lord has arisen, feared nothing. Why should he be afraid, since he now realized that death had died?

This questioning was also appropriate for the office, since many who assume a pastoral office use it as self‑lovers: "In the last days there will come times of stress. For men will be lovers of self" (1 Tim 3:1). One who does not love the Lord is not a fit prelate. A fit prelate is one who does not seek his own advantage, but that of Christ's; and he does this through love: "The love of Christ controls us" (2 Cor 5:14). Love also becomes this office because it benefits others: for it is due to the abundance of love that those who love Jesus will at times give up the quiet of their own contemplation to help their neighbor. Although the Apostle said, "I am sure that neither death nor life... will be able to separate us from the love of God" (Rom 8:39), he added, "For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brethren" (Rom 9:3). Thus a prelate should be questioned about his love.

He adds, more than these, for even as the Philosopher says in his Politics, it is the natural order of things that the one who cares for and governs others should be better. Thus he says that just as the soul is to the body that it rules, and reason is to our lower powers, so man is related to the irrational animals. And there ought to be a similar relation between prelates and their subjects. Thus, according to Gregory, the life of a pastor should be such that he is related to his subjects as a shepherd to his sheep. So Christ says, more than these, because the more Peter loves the better he is: "Do you see him whom the Lord has chosen? There is none like him among all the people" (1 Sam 10:24).

But in selecting someone to rule is it always necessary to choose the one who is unconditionally better, even if the laws say that it is enough to choose one who is merely good? To answer this two distinctions must be made. Some things are sufficient according to human judgment which are still not sufficient according to the divine judgment. According to human judgment, if a person cannot be reproached for something, this is sufficient for his election to stand. For it is obvious that it would be difficult to have elections if they could be nullified because someone was found who was better than the one actually chosen. So, according to our human judgment, it is sufficient if an election is honest and a suitable person is chosen.

But, so far as concerns the divine judgment, and our own conscience, it is necessary to choose that person who is better. Now a person can be unconditionally better; and this is the way a holier person is said to be better, for holiness makes one good. Yet such a person might not be better for the Church. For this purpose, that person would be better who is better educated, more competent, more discerning, and chosen more unanimously. But if other things are equal, such as the benefit and welfare of the Church, one would sin if he were to choose a person who was less unconditionally good than another. There has to be a reason for such a choice. This is either the honor of God and the benefit of the Church, or some private motive. If the motive is the honor of God and the benefit to the Church, these goods will be regarded as linked to the one chosen, and will make him the better person, in these respects. If there is some private motive for the choice, such as some carnal love, the expectation of ecclesiastical advancement, or temporal advantage, the election is a fraud and there has been partiality.

Now we see Peter's answer, Yes, Lord; you know that I love you. This is a clear sign that he had retracted his previous denial. And it shows that if the predestined fall, they are always better after they are corrected. Before his denial, Peter thought that he was better than the other apostles, saying, "Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away" (Mt 26:33). And when Jesus said to him, "You will deny me three times," Peter went against this and even boasted that "Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you" (Mt 26:35). But now, Peter, having been conquered by his own weakness, does not presume to state his love unless it is attested to and confirmed by the Lord. He humbles himself before Christ, saying, You know that I love you: "My witness is in heaven, and he that vouches for me is on high" (Job 16:19). He also humbles himself in respect to the apostles, for he does not say that he loves Jesus more than they do, but simply, I love you. This teaches us not to rank ourselves before others, but others before ourselves: "In humility count others better than yourselves" (Phil 2:3).

We can also notice, as Augustine points out, that when our Lord asks, Do you love (diligis) me, Peter does not answer with the same word, but says I love (amo) you, as if they were the same. And they are the same in reality, but there is some difference in meaning: Love (amor) is a movement of our appetitive power, and if this is regulated by our reason it is the will's act of love, which is called "direction" (dilectio) ‑ because it presupposes an act of election, choice (electio). This is why the brute animals are not said to love (diligere). For if the appetitive movement is not regulated by reason, it is called amor.

After this examination, Christ assigns Peter his office, saying, Feed my lambs, that is, my faithful, which I, the Lamb, call lambs: "Behold, the Lamb of God" (1:29). Thus, one should not be called a Christian who says he is not under the care of that shepherd, that is, Peter: "They shall all have one shepherd" (Ez 37:24); "They shall appoint for themselves one head" (Hos 1:11). It was appropriate that this office be assigned to Peter, the others being passed over, because, according to Chrysostom, he was the extraordinary apostle, the voice of the disciples, and the head of the group.

Peter also restrained himself in this inquiry of our Lord's by answering cautiously, for he remembered earlier on, when Christ's passion was drawing near, he had attributed greater constancy to himself than he possessed.

He says to him again. Here is set forth the second inquiry, in which the procedure is similar, as before. The Lord therefore inquires, as before, about love: Simon, son of John, do you love me? Simon, son of John he is called, because he was the son of John. — And Peter responds: He said to him: Yes, Lord, you know that I love you. Bede: "O how faithful and pure a soul! which does not fear to say to its Creator, before whose eyes all things are naked and open: Lord, you know that I love you." He says to him. Here is set forth the exhortation, as before: Feed my lambs. He repeats the aforesaid exhortation: whence Bede: "This is the sole and true proof of complete love toward God: if you have striven to exercise the care of solicitous labor toward your brothers." Feed, namely by example, as he of whom it is said in the Psalm: "He fed them in the innocence of his heart."

If the faith of the apostle Peter is shaken by his Lord's passion, it is so that with bitter weeping he may hear the soothing words "Feed my sheep."

When then having been asked once and again, he called Him to witness who knoweth the secrets of the heart, and then was asked even a third time, he was troubled, fearing a repetition of what had happened before, (for then, having been strong in assertion, he was afterwards convicted,) and therefore he again betaketh himself to Him. For the saying, "Thou knowest all things," meaneth, "things present, and things to come." Seest thou how he had become better and more sober, being no more self-willed, or contradicting? For on this account he was troubled, "lest perchance I think that I love, and love not, as before when I thought and affirmed much, yet I was convicted at last." But Jesus asketh him the third time, and the third time giveth him the same injunction, to show at what a price He setteth the care of His own sheep, and that this especially is a sign of love towards Him.

And our Lord also called the faithful ones of His pastures by names in which simplicity is indicated: "If thou lovest Me", He said to Simon, the chief of His disciples, "feed My sheep, and My lambs, and My ewes." And as He was called symbolically by the word of the prophecy, "lamb", and "sheep", and John also called Him, "The Lamb of God", even so did He call the disciples of His word by the names which indicate simpleness. And He did this that when all believers heard what names were given to them by the Shepherd they might, like sheep, and lambs, and ewes, be incited to abide in all simpleness, and might not go forth from the law of simplicity, and that like these innocent animals, which are led to death, and are brought to slaughter, and are bound for shearing, and are hunted by wild beasts, they might neither cry out nor complain, but remain in quietness and in the innocency of their nature.

A second time he said to him, "Tend my Sheep," that is, Simon, tend the men who are mature in faith and possessing proven wisdom, who obey you in the prescribed degrees of the church, in the apostolate, in the priesthood, and in the pastoral office.

Now we have the second examination. In order to avoid a lot of repetition, note that Christ says three times, Feed my lambs, because Peter ought to feed them three ways. First, they are to be fed by being taught: "And I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding" (Jer 3:15). Secondly, they are to be fed by example: "Set the believers an example in speech and conduct, in love, in faith, in purity" (1 Tim 4:12); "Upon the mountain heights of Israel," that is, in the excellence of great men, "shall be their pasture" (Ez 34:14). Thirdly, they are to be fed by being offered temporal help: "Woe, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep?" (Ez 34:2).

To feed the sheep is to support the believers in Christ from falling from the faith, to provide earthly sustenance for those under us, to preach and exemplify withal our preaching by our lives, to resist adversaries, to correct wanderers.

(de Verb. Dom. serm. 50) He was grieved because he was asked so often by Him Who knew what He asked, and gave the answer. He replies therefore from his inmost heart; Thou knowest that I love Thee.

(Tract. cxxiv) He says no more, He only replies what he knew himself; he knew he loved Him; whether any else loved Him he could not tell, as he could not see into another's heart: (non occ.). Jesus saith unto him, Feed My sheep; as if to say, Be it the office of love to feed the Lord's flock, as it was the resolution of fear to deny the Shepherd.

What [Christ] said to [Peter] at this point, "Feed my sheep," was surely the same thing that he had said to him more clearly before his passion, "But I have asked on your behalf that your faith may not fail you, and once you have recovered, strengthen your brothers." To feed Christ's sheep is to strengthen those who believe in Christ, lest their faith fail them, and to devote oneself ceaselessly [to seeing to it] that they may make greater and greater progress in their faith. However, we must look carefully at the fact that his feeding of the Lord's flock is not to be carried out with one single approach but should rather be multifaceted. A director must diligently see to it that earthly necessities are not lacking to his subjects and also be careful in providing them with examples of virtues along with words of preaching.… When those who are under his care may perhaps themselves have fallen into error, he as a righteous person should, according to the word of the psalmist, "accuse them mercifully and rebuke them," but he should not soothe their hearts with the oil of harmful approval. This too is one of the obligations of a pious shepherd.

He says to him a third time. Here is set forth the third inquiry in the same order as before, namely question, response, exhortation. The Lord therefore asks about the same thing: Simon, son of John, do you love me? From this text it is clear that to love is taken in a good sense, as to love. — And Peter was saddened. Here is noted Peter's response: but nevertheless he responded with sadness, because, as Chrysostom says, he feared lest it should happen to him as it happened when he said: "I will lay down my life for you"; and therefore he was saddened, because he said to him a third time: Do you love me? But nevertheless he did not despair; rather, he responded confidently and said to him: whence he adds to his response: Lord, you know all things, as God; you know that I love you, you know even better than I. For he knew that he was the one who said in Jeremiah 17: "I am the Lord who searches hearts and reins," that is, thoughts and affections. He says to him: Feed my sheep. Here is noted the exhortation: and by sheep are understood the more perfect subjects. It should be noted that the Lord commands to feed the sheep, not to shear them, not to devour them, because the pastor is not commanded by the love of Christ to feed himself, but the sheep; Ezekiel 34: "Woe to the shepherds of Israel who fed themselves! Are not the sheep fed by the shepherds? You ate the milk and covered yourselves with the wool."

It is asked: why does the Lord ask so many times: Peter, do you love me? Augustine responds: "He asks three times for this reason, so that a threefold confession might be rendered for the threefold denial, lest the tongue serve love less than it served fear." Another reason is given: because he was asking for the purpose of commending his flock; and because he wished to commend the flock three times, therefore he asks three times about love.

It is asked: why does he say to him three times: Feed? And it is answered that the sheep of Christ ought to be fed in three ways, namely by word, by example, and by temporal support; hence Bede: "The solicitude of the pastoral office requires that the ruler of the Church diligently provide lest temporal supports be lacking to the people, and show them examples of virtue, and zealously bestow upon them the word of preaching."

It is asked: why does he say twice that lambs are to be fed and once sheep? I respond that by lambs are understood those who are imperfect and tender in faith, and these need more ample pasture, that is, more solicitous care; but by sheep, the more mature, who are able to govern themselves, and these do not need such great care.

In the last chapter of John: Feed my sheep, was said to Peter: but the sheep of Christ are all who walk by the way of salvation: therefore Peter was set as prelate over all such: therefore one was the shepherd of all the sheep of Christ according to the foundation of the Church: therefore also according to its progress and consummation, one must be obeyed by all.

Bernard, treating the aforementioned words, in the second book to Eugene says thus: "You are the one to whom the keys have been handed over, to whom the sheep have been entrusted. There are indeed other doorkeepers of heaven and shepherds of flocks: but you so much more gloriously, inasmuch as you have more distinctly than the rest inherited both names. They have flocks assigned to them, each one his own; to you alone all have been entrusted, one flock to one shepherd. Not only of sheep, but also of shepherds, you alone are the pastor of all. How shall I prove this, you ask? From the word of the Lord: If you love me, Peter, feed my sheep. Which sheep? The peoples of this or that city, or region, or kingdom? My sheep, he says. To whom is it not plain that he did not designate some, but assigned all? Nothing is excepted where nothing is distinguished." And afterwards: "Your privilege stands unshaken, both in the keys and in the sheep entrusted to you, namely the sign of the singular pontificate of Peter, through which he undertook to govern not one ship, as each of the others his own, but the world itself."

We have been informed by Crementius the sub-deacon, who came to us from you, that the blessed father Cyprian has for a certain reason withdrawn; "in doing which he acted quite rightly, because he is a person of eminence, and because a conflict is impending," which God has allowed in the world, for the sake of cooperating with His servants in their struggle against the adversary, and was, moreover, willing that this conflict should show to angels and to men that the victor shall be crowned, while the vanquished shall in himself receive the doom which has been made manifest to us. Since, moreover, it devolves upon us who appear to be placed on high, in the place of a shepherd, to keep watch over the flock; if we be found neglectful, it will be said to us, as it was said to our predecessors also, who in such wise negligent had been placed in charge, that "we have not sought for that which was lost, and have not corrected the wanderer, and have not bound up that which was broken, but have eaten their milk, and been clothed with their wool; " and then also the Lord Himself, fulfilling what had been written in the law and the prophets, teaches, saying, "I am the good shepherd, who lay down my life for the sheep. But the hireling, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth, and the wolf scatter-eth them." To Simon, too, He speaks thus: "Lovest thou me? He answered, I do love Thee. He saith to him, Feed my sheep." We know that this saying arose out of the very circumstance of his withdrawal, and the rest of the disciples did likewise.

Here is a type given to the churches in that they ought to ask for a threefold confession of Christ from those who have chosen to love him by coming to him in holy baptism. And, by dwelling on this passage, instructors in religion may arrive at the knowledge that they cannot please the chief shepherd, that is, Christ, unless they take thought for the health of the sheep of his fold and their continual well-being.… Surely it is true to say that they are doing the Lord himself service who take, as it were, by the hand the mind of those who have been admitted to the faith and who are expected to be called to maturity in this faith. They are, in fact, eager to establish them firmly in the faith by every help that they can offer. Therefore, by his thrice-repeated confession the thrice-repeated denial of the blessed Peter was done away with. And, by the saying of our Lord, "Feed my lambs," we must understand a renewal as it were of the apostleship already given to him, washing away the disgrace of his fall that came in the intervening period and obliterating his faintheartedness that arose from human infirmity.

It appears from these words that, if one who is able refuses to feed the sheep of almighty God, he shows that he does not love the chief Shepherd. For if, in order to accomplish the good of all, the Only Begotten of the Father came forth from the concealment of the Father into our midst, what shall we say if we prefer our privacy over the good of our neighbors? And so, rest is to be desired by us with all our heart. And yet for the advantage of many it should sometimes be laid aside. For, as we ought with full desire to fly from occupation, so, if there should be a lack of anyone available to preach, we need to put a willing shoulder under the burden of occupation. And this we are taught by the conduct of two prophets [Jeremiah and Isaiah], one of whom attempted to shun the office of preaching, while the other desired it.

I myself am convinced by the Petrine claims, nor looking around the world does there seem much doubt which (if Christianity is true) is the True Church, the temple of the Spirit* dying but living, corrupt but holy, self-reforming and rearising. But for me that Church of which the Pope is the acknowledged head on earth has as chief claim that it is the one that has (and still does) ever defended the Blessed Sacrament, and given it most honour, and put it (as Christ plainly intended) in the prime place. 'Feed my sheep' was His last charge to St Peter; and since His words are always first to be understood literally, I suppose them to refer primarily to the Bread of Life. It was against this that the W. European revolt (or Reformation) was really launched – 'the blasphemous fable of the Mass' – and faith/works a mere red herring. I suppose the greatest reform of our time was that carried out by St Pius X surpassing anything, however needed, that the Council will achieve. I wonder what state the Church would now be but for it.

* Not that one should forget the wise words of Charles Williams, that it is our duty to tend the accredited and established altar, though the Holy Spirit may send the fire down somewhere else. God cannot be limited (even by his own Foundations) – of which St Paul is the first & prime example – and may use any channel for His grace. Even to love Our Lord, and certainly to call him Lord, and God, is a grace, and may bring more grace. Nonetheless, speaking institutionally and not of individual souls the channel must eventually run back into the ordained course, or run into the sands and perish. Besides the Sun there may be moonlight (even bright enough to read by); but if the Sun were removed there would be no Moon to see. What would Christianity now be if the Roman Church has in fact been destroyed?

(Hom. lxxxviii) A third time He asks the same question, and gives the same command; to show of what importance He esteems the superintendence of His own sheep, and how He regards it as the greatest proof of love to Him.

(Hom. lxxxviii) The question asked for the third time disturbed him: Peter was grieved because He said unto him the third time, Lovest thou Me? He was afraid perhaps of receiving a reproof again for professing to love more than he did. So he appeals to Christ Himself: And he said unto Him, Lord, Thou knowest all things, i. e. the secrets of the heart, present and to come.

And our Lord also called the faithful ones of His pastures by names in which simplicity is indicated: "If thou lovest Me", He said to Simon, the chief of His disciples, "feed My sheep, and My lambs, and My ewes." And as He was called symbolically by the word of the prophecy, "lamb", and "sheep", and John also called Him, "The Lamb of God", even so did He call the disciples of His word by the names which indicate simpleness. And He did this that when all believers heard what names were given to them by the Shepherd they might, like sheep, and lambs, and ewes, be incited to abide in all simpleness, and might not go forth from the law of simplicity, and that like these innocent animals, which are led to death, and are brought to slaughter, and are bound for shearing, and are hunted by wild beasts, they might neither cry out nor complain, but remain in quietness and in the innocency of their nature.

The Savior does not say to him, fast, or keep watch for me. But, since the pastoral care of souls is more worthy and more useful to the community, he entrusts him with this. I, he says, need nothing: feed my sheep, and return to me the love with which I loved you, because I will take your care for them as care devoted to me.

He asks him three times, partly to show that He cares so much for the faithful and loves His own sheep so much that the care of His sheep serves as a sign of love for Him Himself; and partly by the threefold questioning and confession He heals the threefold denial, and corrects with words the fall that occurred in words. From this arose the custom of requiring a threefold confession from those desiring to be baptized. After the first and second question, Peter calls as witness Him who knows hearts; he no longer trusts in himself, does not answer hastily, but each time adds: "You know." When Peter was asked a third time, he became troubled, wondering whether he was mistaken in thinking that he loved, when perhaps in reality he did not love, because before he too had thought highly of himself and his own strength, yet the outcome proved him wrong. And now he feared the same thing. Therefore he answers with reverence: "Lord! You know all things, both the present and the future; You know that now I love You, as it seems to me, but whether my love will endure for the time to come, this You know, and I do not vouch for myself." Another person, perhaps, will find a distinction between the terms "lambs" and "sheep," between the words "feed" and "tend." By "lambs," perhaps, are meant beginners, and by "sheep" – those more perfect. Therefore, whoever loves Christ must have care for both the lambs and the sheep, must "feed" the lambs, that is, exercise over them a simpler oversight, and "tend" the sheep, which points to a higher guidance. Sometimes, however, even the most perfect are in need of tender care, and the overseers of the sheep must nourish them. "To tend" expresses a stricter oversight, while "to feed" – a more tender one. What then shall we render to the Lord, who so loved us that He made the care of His sheep the sign of love for Himself?

The third time Christ says to him, Feed my sheep. This is because there are three types of people in the Church: beginners, those who have made some progress, and the perfect. The first two types are the lambs, since they are still imperfect. The others, since they are perfect, are called sheep: "The mountains," that is, the perfect, "skipped like rams," and "the hills," the others, "like lambs" (Ps 114:4). And so all prelates ought to guard their charges as Christ's sheep and not their own. But alas! As Augustine says in his Easter Sermon: "We witness the appearance of certain unfaithful servants who have abandoned Christ's flock and by their thefts have made gold their flock. You hear them say, 'These are my sheep. What do you want with my sheep? I will not let you come to my sheep.' But if we say 'my sheep,' and others talk about their sheep, then Christ has lost his own sheep."

Note also that just as Peter was assigned his office three times, so he was examined three times. This was because he had denied Christ three times. As Augustine says: "A threefold profession was required so that Peter's tongue might show as much love as it had shown of fear, and that life gained would wrest more words than the threat of death." Another reason for this was because Peter was obligated to love Christ for three things. First, because his sin was forgiven, for the one who is forgiven more loves the more (cf. Lk 7:43). Secondly, because he was promised a great honor: "On this rock I will build my Church" (Mt 16:18). Thirdly, because of the office entrusted to him, as right here, when Christ entrusts the care of the Church to him, Feed. "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart," so that you will direct your entire intention to God, "and with all your soul," so that your entire will might rest in God through love, "and with all your might," so that the performance of all your actions will serve God.

Peter became sad because asked three times. As was seen, he was rebuked by our Lord before the passion when he so quickly asserted that he loved him. Now, seeing that he is questioned so many times about his love, he is afraid he will be rebuked again and becomes sad. Thus he says, Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you. He is saying in effect: I do love you; at least I think I do. But you know all things, and perhaps you know of something else that will happen. And so the final commitment of the Church is given to the humbled Peter. According to one of the Greek doctors, this is also the reason why catechumens are questioned three times during their baptism.

And as he [Peter] went forth of the city, he saw the Lord entering into Rome. And when he saw him, he said: Lord, whither goest thou thus (or here)? And the Lord said unto him: I go into Rome to be crucified. And Peter said unto him: Lord, art thou (being) crucified again? He said unto him: Yea, Peter, I am (being) crucified again. And Peter came to himself: and having beheld the Lord ascending up into heaven, he returned to Rome, rejoicing, and glorifying the Lord, for that he said: I am being crucified: the which was about to befall Peter.

He went up therefore again unto the brethren, and told them that which had been seen by him: and they lamented in soul, weeping and saying: We beseech thee, Peter, take thought for us that are young. And Peter said unto them: If it be the Lord's will, it cometh to pass, even if we will it not; but for you, the Lord is able to stablish you in his faith, and will found you therein and make you spread abroad, whom he himself hath planted, that ye also may plant others through him. But I, so long as the Lord will that I be in the flesh, resist not; and again if he take me to him I rejoice and am glad.

And while Peter thus spake, and all the brethren wept, behold four soldiers took him and led him unto Agrippa. And he in his madness (disease) commanded him to be crucified on an accusation of godlessness.

The whole multitude of the brethren therefore ran together, both of rich and poor, orphans and widows, weak and strong, desiring to see and to rescue Peter, while the people shouted with one voice, and would not be silenced: What wrong hath Peter done, O Agrippa? Wherein hath he hurt thee? tell the Romans! And others said: We fear lest if this man die, his Lord destroy us all.

And Peter when he came unto the place stilled the people and said: Ye men that are soldiers of Christ! ye men that hope in Christ! remember the signs and wonders which ye have seen wrought through me, remember the compassion of God, how many cures he hath wrought for you. Wait for him that cometh and shall reward every man according to his doings. And now be ye not bitter against Agrippa; for he is the minister of his father's working. And this cometh to pass at all events, for the Lord hath manifested unto me that which befalleth. But why delay I and draw not near unto the cross?

And having approached and standing by the cross he began to say: O name of the cross, thou hidden mystery! O grace ineffable that is pronounced in the name of the cross! O nature of man, that cannot be separated from God! O love (friendship) unspeakable and inseparable, that cannot be shown forth by unclean lips! I seize thee now, I that am at the end of my delivery hence (or, of my coming hither). I will declare thee, what thou art: I will not keep silence of the mystery of the cross which of old was shut and hidden from my soul. Let not the cross be unto you which hope in Christ, this which appeareth: for it is another thing, different from that which appeareth, even this passion which is according to that of Christ. And now above all, because ye that can hear are able to hear it of me, that am at the last and final hour of my life, hearken: Separate your souls from every thing that is of the senses, from every thing that appeareth, and does not exist in truth. Blind these eyes of yours, close these ears of yours, put away your doings that are seen; and ye shall perceive that which concerneth Christ, and the whole mystery of your salvation: and let thus much be said unto you that hear, as if it had not been spoken. But now it is time for thee, Peter, to deliver up thy body unto them that take it. Receive it then, ye unto whom it belongeth. I beseech you the executioners, crucify me thus, with the head downward and not otherwise: and the reason wherefore, I will tell unto them that hear.

And when they had hanged him up after the manner he desired, he began again to say: Ye men unto whom it belongeth to hear, hearken to that which I shall declare unto you at this especial time as I hang here. Learn ye the mystery of all nature, and the beginning of all things, what it was. For the first man, whose race I bear in mine appearance (or, of the race of whom I bear the likeness), fell (was borne) head downwards, and showed forth a manner of birth such as was not heretofore: for it was dead, having no motion. He, then, being pulled down -who also cast his first state down upon the earth- established this whole disposition of all things, being hanged up an image of the creation (Gk. vocation) wherein he made the things of the right hand into left hand and the left hand into right hand, and changed about all the marks of their nature, so that he thought those things that were not fair to be fair, and those that were in truth evil, to be good. Concerning which the Lord saith in a mystery: Unless ye make the things of the right hand as those of the left, and those of the left as those of the right, and those that are above as those below, and those that are behind as those that are before, ye shall not have knowedge of the kingdom.

This thought, therefore, have I declared unto you; and the figure wherein ye now see me hanging is the representation of that man that first came unto birth. Ye therefore, my beloved, and ye that hear me and that shall hear, ought to cease from your former error and return back again. For it is right to mount upon the cross of Christ, who is the word stretched out, the one and only, of whom the spirit saith: For what else is Christ, but the word, the sound of God? So that the word is the upright beam whereon I am crucified. And the sound is that which crosseth it, the nature of man. And the nail which holdeth the cross-tree unto the upright in the midst thereof is the conversion and repentance of man.

Now whereas thou hast made known and revealed these things unto me, O word of life, called now by me wood (or, word called now by me the tree of life), I give thee thanks, not with these lips that are nailed unto the cross, nor with this tongue by which truth and falsehood issue forth, nor with this word which cometh forth by means of art whose nature is material, but with that voice do I give thee thanks, O King, which is perceived (understood) in silence, which is not heard openly, which proceedeth not forth by organs of the body, which goeth not into ears of flesh, which is not heard of corruptible substance, which existeth not in the world, neither is sent forth upon earth, nor written in books, which is owned by one and not by another: but with this, O Jesu Christ, do I give thee thanks, with the silence of a voice, wherewith the spirit that is in me loveth thee, speaketh unto thee, seeth thee, and beseecheth thee. Thou art perceived of the spirit only, thou art unto me father, thou my mother, thou my brother, thou my friend, thou my bondsman, thou my steward: thou art the All and the All is in thee: and thou Art, and there is nought else that is save thee only.

Unto him therefore do ye also, brethren, flee, and if ye learn that in him alone ye exist, ye shall obtain those things whereof he saith unto you: 'which neither eye hath seen nor ear heard, neither have they entered into the heart of man.' We ask, therefore, for that which thou hast promised to give unto us, O thou undefiled Jesu. We praise thee, we give thee thanks, and confess to thee, glorifying thee, even we men that are yet without strength, for thou art God alone, and none other: to whom be glory now and unto all ages. Amen.

And when the multitude that stood by pronounced the Amen with a great sound, together with the Amen Peter gave up his spirit unto the Lord.

Such was the end reached by that denier and lover; elated by his presumption, prostrated by his denial, cleansed by his weeping, approved by his confession, crowned by his suffering, this was the end he reached, to die with a perfected love for the name of Him with whom, by a perverted forwardness, he had promised to die. He would do, when strengthened by His resurrection, what in his weakness he promised prematurely. For the needful order was that Christ should first die for Peter's salvation, and then that Peter should die for the preaching of Christ. The boldness thus begun by human temerity was an utter inversion of the order that had been instituted by the Truth. Peter thought to lay down his life for Christ, the one to be delivered in behalf of the Deliverer, seeing that Christ had come to lay down His life for all His own, including Peter also, which, you see, was now done. Now and henceforth a true, because graciously bestowed, strength of heart may be assumed for incurring death itself for the name of the Lord, and not a false one presumptuously usurped through an erroneous estimate of ourselves. Now there is no need that we should any more fear the passage out of the present life, because in the Lord's resurrection we have a foregoing illustration of the life to come. Now thou hast cause, Peter, to be no longer afraid of death, because He liveth whom thou didst mourn when dead, and whom in thy carnal love thou didst try to hinder from dying in our behalf. Thou didst dare to step in before the Leader, and thou didst tremble before His persecutor: now that the price has been paid for thee, it is thy duty to follow the Buyer, and follow Him even to the death of the cross. Thou hast heard the words of Him whom thou hast already proved to be truthful; He Himself hath foretold thy suffering, who formerly foretold thy denial.

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shall be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wilt not. And this spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God." "Thou shall stretch forth thy hands," He said; in other words, thou shall be crucified. But that thou mayest come to this, "another shall gird thee, and carry thee," not whither thou wouldest, but "whither thou wouldest not." He told him first what would happen, and then how it should come to pass. For it was not after being crucified, but when actually about to be crucified, that he was carried whither he would not; for after being crucified he went his way, not whither he would not, but rather whither he would. And though when set free from the body he wished to be with Christ, yet, were it only possible, he had a desire for eternal life apart from the grievousness of death, to which grievous experience he was unwillingly carried, but from it [when all was over] he was willingly carried away; unwillingly he came to it, but willingly he conquered it, and left this feeling of infirmity behind that makes every one unwilling to die,-a feeling so permanently natural, that even old age itself was unable to set the blessed Peter free from its influence, even as it was said unto him, "When thou shalt be old," thou shall be led "whither thou wouldest not."

For our consolation the Saviour Himself transfigured also the same feeling in His own person when He said, "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me;" and He certainly had come to die without having any necessity, but only the willingness to die, with power to lay down His life, and with power to take it again. But however great be the grievousness of death, it ought to be overcome by the power of that love which is felt to Him who, being our life, was willing to endure even death in our behalf. For if there were no grievousness, even of the smallest kind, in death, the glory of the martyrs would not be so great. But if the good Shepherd, who laid down His own life for His sheep, has raised up so many martyrs for Himself out of the very sheep, how much more ought those to contend to death for the truth, and even to blood against sin, who are entrusted by Him with the feeding, that is, with the teaching and governing of these very sheep? And on this account, along with the preceding example of His own passion, who can fail to see that the shepherds ought all the more to set themselves closely to imitate the Shepherd, if He was so imitated even by many of the sheep under whom, as the one Shepherd and in the one flock, the shepherds themselves are likewise sheep? For He made all those His sheep for [all of] whom He died, because He Himself also became a sheep that He might suffer for all.

(Tract. cxxiii. 5) That is, shalt be crucified. And to come to this end, Another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. First He said what would come to pass, secondly, how it would come to pass. For it was not when crucified, but when about to be crucified, that he was led whither he would not. He wished to be released from the body, and be with Christ; but, if it were possible, he wished to attain to eternal life without the pains of death: to which he went against his will, but conquered by the force of his will, and triumphing over the human feeling, so natural a one, that even old age could not deprive Peter of it. But whatever be the pain of death, it ought to be conquered by the strength of love for Him, Who being our life, voluntarily also underwent death for us. For if there is no pain in death, or very little, the glory of martyrdom would not be great.

(Tract. cxxiii) He who denied and loved, died in perfect love for Him, for Whom he had promised to die with wrong haste. It was necessary that Christ should first die for Peter's salvation, and then Peter die for Christ's Gospel.

After Peter's confirmation in love was made, here follows his invitation to the consummation of love. Now the consummation of love is that a man lay down his life for Christ: therefore here follows an invitation to imitate the passion.

Peter is therefore certified by the Lord concerning the manner of his death, namely through passion and the cross: and to make it certain, he says: Amen, amen I say to you: and this is the passion, that in his old age he would be crucified for Christ: whence he says: When you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished, that is, you followed your own will: Sirach 18: "Son, do not go after your concupiscences, and turn away from your own will." But when you have grown old, you will stretch out your hands, namely on the cross; and another will gird you, "namely with bonds," as Nero, and will lead you where you do not wish, "that is, to death"; because, as is said in Second Corinthians 5, "we do not wish to be unclothed, but to be further clothed." And the reason for this is given in Ephesians 5: "Because no one ever hated his own flesh." Peter was bound with chains: Acts 12: "Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains."

It is asked about what he says: Another will gird you and lead you where you do not wish. It seems from this that the passion of Peter was involuntary: therefore it was not meritorious. I respond: The will is twofold: of reason and of nature. He suffered willingly by the will of reason, but unwillingly by the will of nature or of sensuality. Nor is this surprising, because it was so in the Head; whence Matthew twenty-six: Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will. Whence Augustine: "Peter came unwilling to death, willing he conquered death, and he left behind this disposition of weakness, by which no one wishes to die, so deeply natural that not even old age could take it away from blessed Peter."

But not to dwell upon ancient examples, let us come to the most recent spiritual heroes. Let us take the noble examples furnished in our own generation. Through envy and jealousy the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours; and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him.

With great kindness and tenderness our Lord Jesus Christ testifies to the fervour of the love which His disciple bore unto Him, and the high honour of his piety and endurance, tried to the uttermost. For He tells him clearly what would be the issue of his apostleship, and what would be the end of his life. For He foretold unto him, that one would take him to a place whither he would not go; that is, in which his persecutors, or those who condemned him to the penalty of death, had fixed the cross. He says, that the place of his crucifixion would be a place whither Peter would not go. For no one of the Saints suffers death of his own free choice. But though death be bitter, and though it come upon them sorely against their will, yet do they who yearn for the glory that God gives disdain earthly life. Therefore Christ foretold, that the blessed Peter would be taken to a place to die in, sore displeasing and hateful unto him. But he would never have attained to so glorious a death, nor have been crucified for Christ, had he not followed His injunction to take charge of the sheep of His fold, and, having the power of the love of Christ firmly rooted in his heart, called to obedience those who have been ensnared into error by the wiles of the devil. For they who ventured on this crime, and slew the blessed Peter, had no other accusation to charge him withal, save only his zeal in Christ's service. We may see then hereby, that our Lord Jesus Christ well, and of necessity, foretold Peter's end, that by the doom that he was destined to suffer he might in a manner put the seal of truth upon the words he spake unto Him: Yea, Lord; Thou knowest that I love Thee. For that he met his death at all on account of preaching the Gospel was surely a plain and incontrovertible proof of affection, and showed that he was in no way lacking in perfect love towards Christ. Christ, then, adds to what He had said, the words "Follow Me," which bear the signification they so commonly have of following Him as a disciple, and also hinting darkly, as I think, at something else; or meaning, Tread in the track of the perils through which I have passed, and walk in the same path, by deed and word succouring the souls of those who are called, and hesitate not to encounter death itself upon the cross, which, Christ says, will be your lot when you reach old age; not suffering Peter to be alarmed before the time, but deferring for a long season the approach of the king of terrors.

Peter appears to have preached in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia to the Jews of the dispersion. And at last, having come to Rome, he was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer in this way.

St. Peter was crucified upside down as a huge inhuman joke; but his human seriousness survived the inhuman joke, because, in whatever posture, he had died for his faith. The modern martyr of the Pankhurst type courts the absurdity without making the suffering strong enough to eclipse the absurdity. She is like a St. Peter who should deliberately stand on his head for ten seconds and then expect to be canonised for it.

Simon Peter the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion — the believers in circumcision, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia — pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord.

And having spoken to him concerning the love towards Himself, He foretelleth to him the martyrdom which he should undergo, showing that He said not to Him what he said as distrusting, but as greatly trusting him; wishing besides to point out a proof of love towards Him, and to instruct us in what manner especially we ought to love Him.

And yet this he did will, and desired; on which account also He hath revealed it to him. For since Peter had continually said, "I will lay down my life for Thee", and, "Though I should die with Thee, yet will I not deny Thee": He hath given him back his desire. What then is the, "Whither thou willest not"? He speaketh of natural feeling, and the necessity of the flesh, and that the soul is unwillingly torn away from the body. So that even though the will were firm, yet still even then nature would be found in fault. For no one lays aside the body without feeling, God, as I said before, having suitably ordained this, that violent deaths might not be many. For if, as things are, the devil has been able to effect this, and has led ten thousand to precipices and pits; had not the soul felt such a desire for the body, the many would have rushed to this under any common discouragement. The, "whither thou willest not," is then the expression of one signifying natural feeling.

But how after having said, "When thou wast young," doth He again say, "When thou art old"? For this is the expression of one declaring that he was not then young; (nor was he; nor yet old, but a man of middle age.) Wherefore then did He recall to his memory his former life? Signifying, that this is the nature of what belongeth to Him. In things of this life the young man is useful, the old useless; "but in Mine," He saith, "not so; but when old age hath come on, then is excellence brighter, then is manliness more illustrious, being nothing hindered by the time of life." This He said not to terrify, but to rouse Him; for He knew his love, and that he long had yearned for this blessing. At the same time He declareth the kind of death. For since Peter ever desired to be in the dangers which were for His sake, "Be of good cheer," He saith, "I will so satisfy thy desire, that, what thou sufferedst not when young, thou must suffer when thou art old."

Then the Evangelist, to rouse the hearer, has added, "This spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God." He said not, "Should die," but, "Should glorify God," that thou mayest learn, that to suffer for Christ, is glory and honor to the sufferer.

"And when He had spoken this, He saith, Follow Me." Here again He alludeth to his tender carefulness, and to his being very closely attached to Himself. And if any should say, "How then did James receive the chair at Jerusalem?" I would make this reply, that He appointed Peter teacher, not of the chair, but of the world.

For 'most excellent Theophilus' Luke compiled the individual events that took place in his presence - as he plainly shows by omitting the martyrdom of Peter

(super. Matt.) It is not easy to find any ready to pass at once from this life; and so he says to Peter, When thou art old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hand.

Thus Peter, the first of the apostles, having been often apprehended, and thrown into prison, and treated with igominy, was last of all crucified at Rome.

We read the lives of the Caesars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising faith. Then is Peter girt by another, when he is made fast to the cross.

Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have Rome, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority (of apostles themselves). How happy is its church, on which apostles poured forth all their doctrine along with their blood! Where Peter endures a passion like his Lord's!

And if a heretic wishes his confidence to rest upon a public record, the archives of the empire will speak, as would the stones of Jerusalem. We read the lives of the Cæsars: At Rome Nero was the first who stained with blood the rising faith. Then is Peter girt by another, [John 21:18] when he is made fast to the cross.

The Lord, having spoken to Peter about love for Himself, also foretells to him the martyrdom that he will endure. He says this in order to show that if He asks him about love, He asks not out of distrust toward him, but out of confidence that he loves, for how can he not love who will even be martyred for Him? He asked in order to more fully reveal the love of Peter himself and to teach all others that if we desire to love Him, we must prove our love for Him through care for the brethren. How then does He foretell his martyrdom? Listen. "When you were young, you girded yourself," and so forth. "Since," He says, "you love Me and have more than once promised to lay down your life for Me in times of danger, be at peace; I will fulfill your desire, so that what you did not suffer in your youth, you will suffer in your old age." He reminds him of his former life in order to show that the spiritual and the carnal stand in inverse relation. In worldly affairs the young man is useful, while the one who has grown old is useless; in spiritual affairs, on the contrary, the struggle is more glorious when old age has come. He says this with the aim of stirring up his love and inflaming him for martyrdom. He also hints to him that he too will be crucified. For the words "you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you" indicate nothing other than being stretched out on the cross and being bound. By the words "when you were young" and again "but when you grow old," he shows that Peter at that time was neither young nor old, but a man in his prime. Why did the Lord tell him that "another will gird you and lead you where you do not wish"? Although Peter desired martyrdom, and desired it ardently, the Lord's words point to the sympathy of our nature for life and to the fact that the soul is reluctant to part from the body. For God so arranged it, and arranged it for our benefit, so that we would not kill ourselves. Therefore no one, even if he be a saint, puts off the body without feeling.

Above, our Lord entrusted the office of shepherd to Peter. Now he foretells his martyrdom. This was pertinent because a good shepherd should lay down his life for his sheep (10:11). It was not granted to the young Peter to lay down his life for Christ; but rather to the old Peter to lay down his life for his sheep. This is what Christ foretold to him. Christ first tells of Peter's past life; then he predicts the end of his future life (v 18). Thirdly, the Evangelist explains our Lord's words (v 19).

Peter's past life showed certain shortcomings, for as a young man he was too presumptuous and self‑willed. But this is characteristic of the young, as the Philosopher says in his Rhetoric. Thus we read in Ecclesiastes (11:9) a kind of reproach: "Rejoice, O young man, in your youth, and let your heart cheer you in the days of your youth; walk in the ways of your heart and the sight of your eyes." Our Lord refers to this trait of Peter and says, When you were young, you girded yourself and walked where you would. He says, you girded yourself, that is, you restrained yourself from certain unlawful and superfluous things, but walked where you would, not allowing yourself to be kept in check by anyone. That is why you always wanted to be in danger for my sake. But it was not granted to you that you suffer for me when young, but when you are old I will fulfill your desire because you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you. What a wondrous prediction! It gives both the time and the suffering. From the time these words were spoken until Peter's death, about thirty‑seven years went by. We can see from this that Peter was quite old.

According to Chrysostom, he says, when you are old, because human affairs are different than divine affairs: in human affairs the young are useful, and the old are not of much use; but in divine matters virtue is not taken away by old age, rather it sometimes becomes even stronger: "My old age is exalted in abundant mercy" (Ps 92:10); "As the days of your youth, so shall your old age be" (Deut 33:25). But this is to be understood only of those who have practiced virtue in their youth, as Cicero says. For those who have passed their youth in idleness will become of little or no value when old. This also teaches us that we rarely find rulers and teachers who are useful to the Church dying young, as Origen remarks in his explanation of Matthew (25:19): "Now after a long time the master of those servants came." He gives Paul as an example. In Acts (7:58) Paul is seen as "a young man," but in Philemon (1:9) he is "an old man." The reason for this is that people of this caliber are so rare, that when they are found, the Lord preserves them to a ripe old age.

He mentions the way he will suffer when he says, you will stretch out your hands, for Peter was crucified. Yet he was crucified using ropes, not nails, so he would not die so quickly. This is the girding spoken of by Christ.

Three things can be considered in the sufferings of the saints. First, there is a natural affection: there is such a natural love between the soul and the body that the soul never desires to be separated from the body, nor the body from the soul: "For while we are still in this tent, we sigh with anxiety; not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed" (2 Cor 5:4); "My soul is very sorrowful, even to death" (Mt 26:38). This is why Christ says, where you do not wish to go, that is, by the impulse of nature, which is so rooted in nature that even old age could not destroy it in Peter. Yet, the desire due to grace weakens this: "My desire is to depart and be with Christ" (Phil 1:23); "We are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord" (2 Cor 5:8). Secondly, the intentions of the persecutors and the saints are different, and carry you where you do not wish to go. Thirdly, we see that we should be prepared to suffer, but not to kill ourselves. Thus Christ says, you will stretch out your hands. This clearly was the case with Peter: for when the people wanted to rebel against Nero and deliver Peter, he forbade it: "Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example" (1 Pet 2:21).

The words another will gird you rightly come before and carry you, the thought being that another will gird you because he will carry you where you do not wish to go. Lest one think this statement was lightly written, it was written after the death of Peter. Peter was killed during Nero's lifetime; and John wrote this Gospel after he returned from the exile to which he had been banished during the reign of Domitian, there being several other emperors between Nero and Domitian.

Peter accomplished later on by the grace of God what he had previously been unable to do by self-reliance. You see, after the Lord had entrusted him with his, not Peter's sheep, to feed them, not for himself but for the Lord, he told him about his future martyrdom, which he had forfeited the first time because he had been in much too much of a hurry. "When you are older," he said, "someone else will gird you and carry you where you do not wish to go. He said this, though, to signify by what death he was going to glorify the Lord." It came about that Peter arrived at his martyrdom, having washed away his denial with his tears. What had been promised him by the Savior could not be taken away from him by the tempter.

He said, "Follow me," but not in the same way as when he had previously called the disciples. Then too, certainly, he said, "Follow me." But then it was to school he was summoning them; now it is to the prize giving.

Why is it said to Peter, "Follow me," and not to the others who were likewise present? Surely the disciples followed Him also as their Master. But if it is to be understood only in reference to his suffering, was Peter the only one that suffered for the truth of Christianity? Was there not present there amongst those seven, another son of Zebedee, the brother of John, who, after His ascension, is plainly recorded to have been slain by Herod? But some one may say that, as James was not crucified, it was properly enough said to Peter, "Follow me," inasmuch as he underwent not only death, but, like Christ, even the death of the cross.

It is no unimportant question why the Lord, when He manifested Himself for the third time to the disciples, said unto the Apostle Peter, "Follow me;" but of the Apostle John, "Thus I wish him to remain till I come, what is that to thee?" When the Lord, then, had announced beforehand to Peter by what death he was to glorify God, "He saith unto him, Follow me. Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; who also leaned on His breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that shall betray Thee? Peter, therefore, seeing him, saith to Jesus, Lord, and what [of] this man? Jesus saith unto him, Thus do I wish him to remain till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me."

There are two states of life, therefore, preached and commended to herself from heaven, that are known to the Church, whereof the one is in faith, the other in sight; one in the temporal sojourn in a foreign land, the other in the eternity of the [heavenly] abode; one in labor, the other in repose; one on the way, the other in the fatherland; one in active work, the other in the wages of contemplation; one declines from evil and makes for good, the other has no evil to decline from, and has great good to enjoy; the one fights with a foe, the other reigns without a foe; the one is brave in the midst of adversities, the other has no experience of adversity; the one is bridling its carnal lusts, the other has full scope for spiritual delights; the one is anxious with the care of conquering, the other secure in the peace of victory; the one is helped in temptations, the other, free from all temptations, rejoices in the Helper Himself; the one is occupied in relieving the indigent, the other is there, where no indigence is found; the one pardons the sins of others, that its own may be pardoned to itself, the other neither has anything to pardon nor does aught for which pardon has to be asked; the one is scourged with evils that it may not be elated with good things, the other is free from all evil by such a fullness of grace that, without any temptation to pride, it may cleave to that which is supremely good; the one discerneth both good and evil, the other has only that which is good presented to view: therefore the one is good, but miserable as yet; the other, better and blessed. This one was signified by the Apostle Peter, that other by John.

The whole of the one is passed here to the end of this world, and there finds its termination, the other is deferred for its completion till after the end of this world, but has no end in the world to come. Hence it is said to the latter, "Follow me;" but of the former, "Thus I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me." For what means this last? So far as my wisdom goes, so far as I comprehend, what is it but this, Follow thou me by imitating me in the endurance of temporal evils; let him remain till I come to restore everlasting good? And this may be expressed more clearly in this way: Let perfected action, informed by the example of my passion, follow me; but let contemplation only begun remain [so] till I come, to be perfected when I come. For the godly plenitude of patience, reaching forward even unto death, followeth Christ; but the fullness of knowledge tarrieth till Christ come, to be manifested then.

Let no one, however, separate these distinguished apostles. In that which was signified by Peter, they were both alike; and in that which was signified by John, they will both be alike hereafter. In their representative character, the one was following, the other tarrying; but in their personal faith they were both of them enduring the present evils of the misery here, both of them expecting the future good things of the blessedness to come. And such is the case, not with them alone, but with the holy universal Church, the spouse of Christ, who has still to be rescued from the present trials, and to be preserved in the future happiness. And these two states of life were symbolized by Peter and John, the one by the one, the other by the other; but in this life they both of them walked for a time by faith, and the other they shall both of them enjoy eternally by sight. For the whole body of the saints, therefore, inseparably belonging to the body of Christ, and for their safe pilotage through the present tempestuous life, did Peter, the first of the apostles, receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven for the binding and loosing of sins; and for the same congregation of saints, in reference to the perfect repose in the bosom of that mysterious life to come did the evangelist John recline on the breast of Christ.

(Tract. cxxiii) He who denied and loved, died in perfect love for Him, for Whom he had promised to die with wrong haste. It was necessary that Christ should first die for Peter's salvation, and then Peter die for Christ's Gospel.

(Tract. cxxiv) Our Lord having foretold to Peter by what death he should glorify God, bids him follow Him. And when He had spoken this, He saith unto him, Follow Me. Why does He say, Follow Me, to Peter, and not to the others who were present, who as disciples were following their Master? Or if we understand it of his martyrdom, was Peter the only one who died for the Christian truth? Was not James put to death by Herod? Some one will say that James was not crucified, and that this was fitly addressed to Peter, because he not only died, but suffered the death of the cross, as Christ did.

Now this, namely that you will stretch out your hands, he said, signifying by what death he would glorify God: because by the death of the cross, which, although before Christ it was to be held in contempt, afterwards became glorious: and by this Peter was made glorious. Whence Augustine says: "That denier, both lifted up by presumption, cast down by denying, afterwards purged by weeping, proved by confessing, was crowned by suffering." By this Peter glorified the Lord, just as Paul said in Philippians 1: "Christ will be magnified in my body, whether by life or by death." And because the passion is not good unless it is voluntary: therefore he exhorts Peter to suffer voluntarily: and for this reason he says: And when he had said this, he says to him, that is, to Peter: Follow me, come voluntarily to the passion of the cross, according to what Peter himself says in First Peter 2: "Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example, that you might follow his steps." Concerning this following or imitation, the Lord said to Peter above in chapter thirteen: "Where I go, you cannot come now; but you shall follow afterwards."

It is asked about what he says: Signifying by what death he would glorify God, because above in chapter five: I do not receive glory from men; therefore, since Peter was a man, he did not glorify God. I respond: It must be said that although God is not glorified in himself, he is nevertheless glorified to us in his Saints who suffer for his glory, because through this it becomes known to us how much must be suffered for the love of God by the example of the Saints.

It is asked about the fact that the Lord specially says to Peter: You, follow me; because if it is understood by way of perfection, many others followed; if by way of passion, likewise; if by the kind of death, Andrew also followed. And it is answered here according to some that you does not indicate distinction absolutely there, but only in respect to John, about whom the discourse was. Or it must be said that you indicates there more significance than distinction: for since Peter was the head of the Church and the chief prelate, just as he excelled in prelacy, so also he ought to excel in imitation.

The Lord did not hand over his little flock to its pastor until he had received genuine pledges. He received the threefold [confession] that [Simon] had professed as trustworthy pledges for the three [denials]. Therefore, when his Master said [to him], "Do you love me?" our Lord was wanting to receive from him his true love so that, after having given the pledge of his love, [Simon] might receive [Jesus'] sheep as a flock. When [the Lord] saw that his mouth was confessing and that his tears were a seal, he gave him the reward reserved for pastors, namely, death, since this is the crown of victory of the pastors and their shepherds. [The Lord] was not able to give Simon the allotted portion of death until he had received from him [the pledge of] his love. For in the same way our Lord would not have given his life for his little flock if it had not been on account of his love for it.

[Nero] publicly announced himself as the first among God's chief enemies and so was led on to the slaughter of the apostles. It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day. It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the church, who arose under Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid: "But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church." And that they both suffered martyrdom at the same time is stated by Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in his epistle to the Romans in the following words: "You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both of them planted and likewise taught us in our Corinth. And they taught together in the same way in Italy and suffered martyrdom at the same time." I have quoted these things in order that the truth of the history might be still more confirmed.

If equanimity be the contention, you have Lycurgus choosing death by self-starvation, because the Lacons had made some emendation of his laws: the Christian, even when he is condemned, gives thanks. If the comparison be made in regard to trustworthiness, Anaxagoras denied the deposit of his enemies: the Christian is noted for his fidelity even among those who are not of his religion.

The Evangelist, according to his custom, adds in explanation of the words: "This he said, signifying by what death Peter would glorify God." Jesus said to Peter "you will stretch out your hands" and so forth, signifying that he would suffer martyrdom for Him. He calls Peter's death the glory of God, because suffering for Him unto death is truly the glory of God. For if the soul is not fully convinced that He is the true God, then a man will not die for Him. And therefore the death of the saints is a confirmation of the glory of God. The Lord entrusted to Peter the care of all believers. For if James received the throne in Jerusalem, Peter received it in the whole world. After this the Lord says to him: "Follow Me," showing His care for him and His great affection toward him. By "following," understand here both diligence in all deeds and words. For those follow Him who walk in the footsteps of His life and imitate His uprightness in all things. Perhaps He commands Peter to follow Him physically as well, showing, as I said, His special affection for him. For we make those who are close to us our followers.

Peter hearing that he was to suffer death for Christ, asks whether John was to die: Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on His breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth Thee? Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?

i. e. Shall he not die?

Or let him say, Christ did not deny that John was to die, for whatever is born dies; but said, I will that he tarry till I come, i. e. to live to the end of the world, and then he shall suffer martyrdom for Me. And therefore they confess that he still lives, but will be killed by Antichrist, and will preach Christ's name with Elias. But if his sepulchre be objected, then they say that he entered in alive, and went out of it afterwards.

When our Lord says to Peter, Follow Me, He confers upon him the superintendence over all the faithful, and at the same time bids him imitate Him in every thing, word and work. He shows too His affection for Peter; for those who are most dear to us, we bid follow us.

Some have understood, Till I come, to mean, Till I come to punish the Jews who have crucified Me, and strike them with the Roman rod. For they say that this Apostle lived up to the time of Vespasian, who took Jerusalem, and dwelt near when it was taken. Or, Till I come, i. e. till I give him the commission to preach, for to you I commit now the pontificate of the world: and in this follow Me, but let him remain till I come and call him, as I do thee now.

John mentions this as something in the future, saying, This he said to show by what death he was to glorify God, for the death of the saints gives glory to Christ: "Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death" (Phil 1:20); "But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief... yet if one suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but under that name let him glorify God" (1 Pet 4:15). Indeed, the greatness of the Lord is shown by the fact that the saints brave death for his truth and faith.

After the Evangelist showed what our Lord had in mind for Peter, he now tells about John. First, we see the commendation of the disciple, John; secondly, his gospel is commended (v 25). In regard to the first, we see the occasion for John's commendation; and then the commendation itself, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

The occasion for John's commendation was Christ's invitation to Peter to follow him. And after he said this to him, that is, after Christ told Peter about his office and martyrdom, he said to him, Jesus said to Peter, Follow me. For Augustine, this means follow me in martyrdom, by suffering for me; for it is not enough just to suffer in some way, but this must be done by following Christ, that is, by suffering for his sake: "Blessed are you when men hate you... on account of the Son of man" (Lk 6:22); "Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps" (1 Pet 2:21).

Many others who were present would also suffer for Christ, especially James, who was the first to be killed: "He killed James the brother of John with the sword" (Acts 12:2). Why then does Christ say to Peter in particular, Follow me? The reason, according to Augustine, was that Peter not only suffered death for Christ, but also followed Christ even in the kind of death, that is, death by the cross: "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me" (Mt 16:24). Or, according to Chrysostom, in saying Follow me, Christ means in your office as prelate, leader. He was saying in effect: As I have the care of the Church, received from my Father ‑ "Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage" (Ps 2:8) ‑ so will you be, in my place, over the whole Church.

But after Christ's ascension, why did James hold first place in Jerusalem? We can say that James had a special jurisdiction over that place, but Peter had the universal authority over the whole Church of believers.

The Lord either said what he said to Peter about his martyrdom, or he said it about the gospel of John. As regards the martyrdom and this "Follow me," [he means] suffer for me, suffer what I did. Because Christ was crucified, Peter too was crucified … while John experienced none of this. That is what is meant by, "It is thus that I wish him to remain." Let him fall asleep without wounds, without torment, and wait for me. You, Peter, "Follow me," suffer what I did. That's one way these words can be explained.…As regards the Gospel of John, though, this is what I think is meant: that Peter wrote about the Lord, others too wrote; but their writing was more concerned with the Lord's humanity.… But while there is something about the divinity of Christ in Peter's letters, in John's gospel it is very much to the fore.… He soared above the clouds and soared above the stars, soared above the angels, soared above every creature and arrived at the Word through which all things were made.

"Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple dieth not: yet Jesus said not unto him, He dieth not; but, Thus do I wish him to remain till I come, what is that to thee?" You see the great extent in this Gospel of a question which, by its depth, must exercise in no ordinary way the mind of the inquirer. For why is it said to Peter, "Follow me," and not to the others who were likewise present? Who can readily believe that anything else was meant than what the brethren who lived at the time believed, namely, that that disciple was not to die, but to abide in this life till Jesus came? But John himself removed such an idea, by giving a flat contradiction to the report that the Lord had said so. For why should he add, "Jesus saith not, He dieth not," save to prevent what was false from taking hold of the hearts of men?

(Tract. cxxiv.) Or perhaps he will allow that John still lies in his sepulchre at Ephesus, but asleep, not dead; and will give us a proof, that the soil over his grave is moist and watery, owing to his respiration. But why should our Lord grant it as a great privilege to the disciple whom He loved, that he should sleep this long time in the body, when he released Peter rent the burden of the flesh by a glorious martyrdom, and gave him what Paul had longed for, when he said, I have a desire to depart and be with Christ? If there really takes place at John's grave that which report says, it is either done to commend his precious death, since that had not martyrdom to commend it, or for some other cause not known to us. Yet the question remains, Why did our Lord say of one who was about to die, I will that he tarry till I come? It may be asked too why our Lord loved John the most, when Peter loved our Lord the most? I might easily reply, that the one who loved Christ the more, was the better man, and the one whom Christ loved the more, the more blessed; only this would not be a defence of our Lord's justice. This important question then I will endeavour to answer. The Church acknowledges two modes of life, as divinely revealed, that by faith, and that by sight. The one is represented by the Apostle Peter, in respect of the primacy of his Apostleship; the other by John: wherefore to the one it is said, Follow Me, i. e. imitate Me in enduring temporal sufferings; of the other it is said, I will that he tarry till I come: as if to say, Do thou follow Me, by the endurance of temporal sufferings, let him remain till I come to give everlasting bliss; or to open out the meaning more, Let action be perfected by following the example of My Passion, but let contemplation wait inchoate till at My coming it be completed: wait, not simply remain, continue, but wait for its completion at Christ's coming. Now in this life of action it is true, the more we love Christ, the more we are freed from sin; but He does not love us as we are, He frees us from sin, that we may not always remain as we are, but He loves us heretofore rather, because hereafter we shall not have that which displeases Him, and which He frees us from. So then let Peter love Him, that we may be freed from this mortality; let John be loved by Him, that we may be preserved in that immortality. John loved less than Peter, because, as he represented that life in which we are much more loved, our Lord said, I will that he remain (i. e. wait) till I come; seeing that that greater love we have not yet, but wait till we have it at His coming. And this intermediate state is represented by Peter who loves, but is loved less, for Christ loves us in our misery less than in our blessedness: and we again love the contemplation of truth such as it will be then, less in our present state, because as yet we neither know nor have it. But let none separate those illustrious Apostles; that which Peter represented, and that which John represented, both were sometime to be.

(Tract. cxxiv) Jesus saith unto him, What is that to thee? and He then repeats, Follow thou Me, as if John would not follow Him, because he wished to remain till He came; Then went this saying abroad among the disciples, that that disciple should not die. Was it not a natural inference of the disciple's? But John himself does away with such a notion: Yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? But if any so will, let him contradict, and say that what John says is true, viz. that our Lord did not say that that disciple should not die, but that nevertheless this was signified by using such words as John records.

Jesus says to him. Here thirdly Peter is assured that John would not suffer, through the Lord's response, in which he reveals the truth, to satisfy the question, and rebukes curiosity, to correct the one asking. He reveals the truth when he says: Jesus says to him: Thus I wish him to remain until I come: Bede: "Thus, that is, to await the last day without the violence of persecution": he responds to the one asking. When he says: What is it to you? Follow me, he rebukes him for the curiosity of the question: whence Chrysostom: "What is it to you, if I wish him to remain thus? Attend to the things that are your own, and be solicitous about these": Sirach 3: "Do not be curious about his many works, but think always on those things which he has commanded you"; and therefore he repeats: Follow me, as if to say: think about this and be solicitous about this.

It is asked about what he says: Thus I will him to remain until I come. Therefore it seems that at least until the Lord's coming his soul has not been separated from his body: for after that, nothing is established from the text: therefore it seems that John has not yet died: and as evidence for this is the fact that his body is not found. I respond: It must be said that besides the first interpretation of the disciples, which they made, which the Evangelist himself refutes — namely that he would not die — there are three other interpretations. One is that he has not died, but will die at the coming of the Lord: but for now he is in slumber beneath the earth, and therefore his body is not to be found. — But this position is improbable: because it is not to be believed that the Lord would defer for so long showing his glory to the disciple whom he loved, which glory the Apostle desired, in Philippians 1: I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ. Another opinion is that the Lord assumed him in body and soul, and in that assumption he died and rose again. — Even if this opinion cannot be so easily disproved, nevertheless, because it lacks authority, it is dismissed with the same ease with which it is proved. The third opinion says that John died, and asserts nothing about his body, because nothing certain is found. But what was said: Thus I will him to remain until I come, that is, "to await the last day not of the age, but of his own death, when I myself coming shall receive him into the dwelling of eternal blessedness."

The inspired Evangelist points to himself obscurely, but still sufficiently to indicate who is meant. For he it was who was the beloved disciple, and who leaned upon Christ's Breast at the last Supper, and asked who it was that should betray Him. Peter, then, observing him, longed for information, and sought to know in what perils he would be involved in the time to come, and in what way his life would end. But the question seemed unseemly, and it appeared to savour rather of a meddlesome and inquisitive spirit, that, after having learnt what was to happen unto himself, he should seek to know the future fate of others. For this cause, then, I think the Lord makes no direct reply to his question or inquiry, but, diverting the aim of the questioner, does not say that John will not die, but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? That is to say, Thou hast heard, O Peter, the things concerning thyself, what need is there for thee to ask questions about others, and to seek to fathom out of season the knowledge of the Divine decrees. For if he never die at all, He says, what consolation will this be to thy heart? The man who is wise and prudent, then, if he is doomed to die, will not trouble himself as to whether another will be saved alive or not; for it will be enough for him to suffer his own doom, and he will receive no comfort at all from the misfortune or good cheer of another. The passage is fraught with some such meaning as this. Peter's speech here seems to imply that the blessed Peter anxiously desired to know what was destined to be John's fate, as he would have considered it a consolation in his own sufferings if John were surely fated to, die by torture, either of the same or of some other kind. And do not be amazed at this, but rather take the following thought into consideration. It is common to us, however profitless it be, to like at times not to be seen to be the only ones who are suffering, or who are destined to undergo some dreadful fate, but to prefer to hear that others have either suffered it already or are expected to suffer it in the future.

Antony was confused as he meditated upon the depths of God's judgements, and he asked God, 'Lord, how is it that some die young and others grow old and sick? Why are there some poor and some rich? Why are there those who are bad and rich and oppress the good poor?' He heard a voice saying to him, 'Antony, worry about yourself; these other matters are up to God, and it will not do you any good to know them.'

I will that he tarry, i. e. I will not that he suffer martyrdom, but wait for the quiet dissolution of the flesh, when I shall come and receive him into eternal blessedness.

Since he spake from strong affection, and wishing not to be torn away from him, Christ, to show that however much he might love, he could not go beyond His love, saith, "If I will that he tarry - what is that to thee?" By these words teaching us not to be impatient, nor curious beyond what seemeth good to Him. For because Peter was ever hot, and springing forward to enquiries such as this, to cut short his warmth, and to teach him not to enquire farther, He saith this.

However, inasmuch as they were now going to have the care of the world committed to them, and could not remain together without injury to their charge, our Lord says, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? as if to say, Attend to the work committed to thee, and do it: if I will that he abide here, what is that to thee?

Knowing that Peter cared about John and did not wish to be separated from him, the Lord, in order to put an end to their untimely union and attachment to one another, says: "You have been entrusted with a task; carry it out and follow Me, as I lead you out to preach and place the whole world in your hands. But if I wish him to remain here, in the vicinity of Galilee, and do not wish to send him together with you, what is that to you?" The words "till I come" some understood thus: until I come upon the Jews who crucified Me, to punish them by means of the Romans and destroy their city. For they say that this apostle (John) remained in the highland regions almost until the reign of Vespasian, preaching and dwelling there, and before the capture of Jerusalem he withdrew from there. So then, since a great task was being entrusted to them — the preaching of the Gospel — they no longer needed to be together with one another, but to go separately, one to some people, and the other to others.

Christ's answer is given, So it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Notice that the Greek text does not have "So" but If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? Yet the difference is not too important, for whatever the expression, the meaning understood by the apostles from the beginning was that John was not going to die. So it is my will that he remain until I come, was for them the same as saying, John will not die until I come.

But this interpretation is rejected by what follows: yet Jesus did not say to him that he was not to die, but, So it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you?

Those who defend the first interpretation, claim that John added this not to exclude the first interpretation but to show that our Lord did not convey that meaning by these words, but only by the words, So it is my will that he remain. This is the reason they say that John has not yet died.

There are various opinions about John's burial. All say that it is true that he was buried in a tomb which still exists. But some say he entered his tomb while still alive, and then left it by divine power, transported to the region of Enoch and Elias, and he is being kept there until the end of the world. According to this, the meaning is: So it is my will that he remain alive until the end of the world; and then, under the Antichrist, he will be martyred along with those other two. For it is not right that he should not die, for whatever is born dies: "It is appointed for men to die once" (Heb 9:27).

Others say he entered his tomb at Ephesus alive, and he remains there still alive, but sleeping, until the Lord comes. They base their theory on the fact that the soil there moves up and down in rhythm with John's breathing. Augustine rejects this by saying that it is not as good to be alive and sleeping as to be alive and blessed. Why then would Christ reward the disciple he loved above the others with a long sleep and deprive him of that great good for the sake of which the apostle wanted to be dissolved and to be with Christ (Phil 1:23). Thus, we should not believe this. Rather, we should say that he died and arose with his body indicated by the fact that his body cannot be found ‑ and remains happy with Christ, as Christ invited him: "He who testifies to these things says, Surely I am coming soon" (Rev 22:20).

Augustine explains this passage mystically. Then the word remain means "continue on," or "persist," as in "Remain in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high" (Lk 24:49). Consequently, our Lord is saying about John, that is, about the contemplative life, So it is my will that he remain, that is, continue on, until I come, either at the end of the world, or at the death of any contemplative; for the contemplative life although begun here is not completed here. It remains incomplete and continues on till Christ comes to complete it: "Then they were... told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren should be complete" (Rev 6:11); "Mary has chosen the good portion, which shall not be taken away from her" (Lk 10:42); "Long life is in her right hand; in her left hand are riches and honor" (Prv 3:16). Meanwhile, the active life, completed and vivified by the example of Christ's passion, follows him by suffering for him.

Chrysostom understands it this way: So it is my will that he remain, that is, to remain in Judea, and to preach on this earth; and I want you, Peter, to follow me by having a concern for the entire world, and by suffering for me; and John is to remain until I come, to destroy the Jewish nation. What is that to you? means "These things are for me to decide." For we do see from history that John did not leave Judea until Vespasian came to Judea and took Jerusalem; then John set out for Asia.

Then there is the interpretation of Jerome: Follow me! Peter, by your martyrdom; and so, now speaking about John, it is my will that he remain, without the sufferings of martyrdom and death, until I come, to call him to myself ‑ "I will come again and take you to myself" (14:3) ‑ what is that, this privilege, to you? And so in the stories about blessed John it is said that when he was ninety years old our Lord Jesus Christ appeared to him and invited him to his banquet.

There is, then, nothing for us to fear in death, nothing for us to mourn, whether life, which was received from nature be rendered up to it again, or whether it is sacrificed to some duty that claims it, and this will be either an act of religion or the exercise of some virtue. And no one ever wished to remain as at present. This has been supposed to have been promised to John, but it is not the truth. We hold fast to the words and deduce the meaning from them. He himself in his own writing denies that there was a promise that he should not die, that no one from that instance might yield to an empty hope. But if to wish for this would be an extravagant hope, how much more extravagant would it be to grieve without rule for what has happened according to rule!

This saying therefore went out among the brethren. Here fourthly the understanding of the believers is corrected, that John would simply not die: whence he says: That that disciple does not die, against that verse of the Psalm: "Who is the man that shall live and not see death." And Jesus did not say. Here the correction of that saying is set forth, because Jesus did not say this, namely that he does not die; he did not say: He does not die, because, as is said in Ecclesiastes 9, "there is no one who lives forever": but: Thus I wish him to remain until I come: what is it to you? This is to be read and expounded in a qualified sense, as above.

"Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die; yet Jesus said not that he shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?" "Do not thou on any account suppose," He saith, "that I order your matters after a single rule." And this He did to withdraw them from their unseasonable sympathy for each other; for since they were about to receive the charge of the world, it was necessary that they should no longer be closely associated together; for assuredly this would have been a great loss to the world. Wherefore He saith unto him, "Thou hast had a work entrusted to thee, look to it, accomplish it, labor and struggle. What if I will that he tarry here? Look thou to and care for thine own matters."

And observe, I pray thee, here also the absence of pride in the Evangelist; for having mentioned the opinion of the disciples, he corrects it, as though they had not comprehended what Jesus meant. "Jesus said not," he tells us, "that he shall not die, but, If I will that he tarry."

John underwent death, although concerning him there had prevailed an unfounded expectation that he would remain alive until the coming of the Lord.

Even John underwent death, although concerning him there had prevailed an ungrounded expectation that he would remain alive until the coming of the Lord. Heresies, indeed, for the most pan spring hurriedly into existence, from examples furnished by ourselves: they procure their defensive armour from the very place which they attack.

Peter turned to the secret decision of providence and saw from a distance the disciple John, son of thunder, who followed slowly, admiring the great and sublime promise made by our Lord to Peter.… Since John lived long, that is, seventy-three years after the ascension of the Lord to the time of Trajan, and died after all the other apostles in peace and serenity by natural death, the Lord alludes to this by saying, If I want him to live long enough so that he may remain until my return, you do not need to investigate this. Only pay attention to what is yours, that is, take care of your work and follow me.

Look, please, at the modesty of the evangelist, with what care he corrects the mistaken understanding of many who did not comprehend what the Lord said about him, but thought that he would not die. This was not the case; the Lord did not say that he would not die, but that he would not preach at the same time as Peter, but would remain after him. "Until I come," that is, until I wish to bring him out to preach as well. I am now sending you out to care for the whole world, and you follow Me, but let him remain here until I come again and bring him out too, just as I did you. Some understand it this way: Peter, having heard that he would die for Christ, said, "What about John? Will he not also die?" Christ did not deny this, for everyone who is born will also die, but said, "If I want him to remain, that is, to live until the end of the world and then become a martyr for Me." Hence they also say that he is alive and will be put to death by the Antichrist, when together with Elijah he will preach Christ. If they point to his tomb, what of it? He entered it alive and was then translated, like Enoch and Elijah. So, the Evangelist refutes the false opinion of those who thought that this disciple would not die, but would be immortal: for it is an outright lie that a man could be immortal. Although Enoch and Elijah did not die, nevertheless they are mortal. So too he, although he has not died, will die. Therefore the understanding of the words "will not die" in the sense that he would be immortal, is false. Others assert that he died, and they understand the words "if I want him to remain" in the way we explained above. We have presented all opinions so that none would be unknown to the curious. In our opinion, the words "that he remain until I come" are better understood not as referring to life, but to separation from Peter, as the illustrious and golden-mouthed John understood it.

Then the Evangelist shows how the disciples understood these words of our Lord. They thought that John would not die. The saying spread abroad among the brethren, the disciples ‑ "Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity!" (Ps 133:1) ‑ that this disciple, John, was not to die. But he corrects this error, saying, Yet Jesus did not say to him that he was not to die: "Are you also still without understanding?" (Mt 15:16). The rest has been explained.

Some people seem able to discuss different theories of this act as if they understood them all and needed only evidence as to which was best. This light has been withheld from me. I do not know and can't imagine what the disciples understood Our Lord to mean when, His body still unbroken and His blood unshed, He handed them the bread and wine, saying they were His body and blood. I can find within the forms of my human understanding no connection between eating a man—and it is as Man that the Lord has flesh—and entering into any spiritual oneness or community or koinonia with him.

It explains why this new life is spread not only by purely mental acts like belief, but by bodily acts like baptism and Holy Communion. It is not merely the spreading of an idea; it is more like evolution—a biological or superbiological fact. There is no good trying to be more spiritual than God. God never meant man to be a purely spiritual creature. That is why He uses material things like bread and wine to put the new life into us. We may think this rather crude and unspiritual. God does not: He invented eating. He likes matter. He invented it.

For we do not eat God simply, God being impalpable and incorporeal; nor again, the flesh of man simply, which would not profit us. But God having taken flesh into union with Himself, that flesh is quickening. Not that it has changed its own for the Divine nature; but, just as heated iron remains iron, with the action of the heat in it; so our Lord's flesh is quickening, as being the flesh of the Word of God.

In a word, He now explains how that which He speaks of comes to pass, and what it is to eat His body and to drink His blood. "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." This it is, therefore, for a man to eat that meat and to drink that drink, to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwelling in him. Consequently, he that dwelleth not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwelleth not, doubtless neither eateth His flesh [spiritually] nor drinketh His blood [although he may press the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ carnally and visibly with his teeth], but rather doth he eat and drink the sacrament of so great a thing to his own judgment, because he, being unclean, has presumed to come to the sacraments of Christ, which no man taketh worthily except he that is pure: of such it is said, "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."

Then He explains what it is to eat His body and drink His blood: He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, dwelleth in Me, and I in him. So then to partake of that meat and that drink, is to dwell in Christ and Christ in thee. He that dwelleth not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwelleth not, neither eateth His flesh, nor drinketh His blood: but rather eateth and drinketh the sacrament of it to his own damnation.

(de Verb. Dom.) As for those, as indeed there are many, who either eat that flesh and drink that blood hypocritically, or, who having eaten, become apostates, do they dwell in Christ, and Christ in them? Nay, but there is a certain mode of eating that flesh, and drinking that blood, in the which he that eateth and drinketh, dwelleth in Christ, and Christ in him.

(de Civ. Dei, l. xxi. c. 25) That is to say, such an one eateth the body and drinketh the blood of Christ not in the sacramental sense, but in reality.

"He who eats my flesh," by spiritual eating, "and drinks my blood abides in me," through love: First John four: "He who abides in love abides in God, and God in him"; "and I in him," through indwelling: below in chapter fourteen: "If anyone loves me, he will keep my word: and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him."

Manifoldly does Christ initiate us by these words, and since His Discourse is hard of attainment by the more unlearned, asking for itself rather the understanding of faith than investigation, He revolving again and again over the same ground makes it easy in divers ways, and from all parts illumines what is useful therein, fixing as a kind of foundation and groundwork the most excellent desire for it. For he that eateth My Flesh (saith He) and drinketh My Blood abideth in Me and I in him. For as if one should join wax with other wax, he will surely see (I suppose) the one in the other; in like manner (I deem) he who receiveth the Flesh of our Saviour Christ and drinketh His Precious Blood, as He saith, is found one with Him, commingled as it were and immingled with Him through the participation, so that he is found in Christ, Christ again in him. Thus was Christ teaching us in the Gospel too according to Matthew, saying, The Kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened. Who then the woman is, what the three measures of meal, or what the measure at all, shall be spoken of in its proper place: for the present we will speak only of the leaven. As then Paul saith that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, so the least portion of the Blessing blendeth our whole body with itself, and filleth it with its own mighty working, and so Christ cometh to be in us, and we again in Him. For one may truly say that the leaven is in the whole lump, and the lump by like reasoning is in the whole leaven: you have in brief the sense of the words. And if we long for eternal life, if we pray to have the Giver of immortality in ourselves, let us not like some of the more heedless refuse to be blessed nor let the Devil deep in wickedness, lay for us a trap and snare a perilous reverence.

Yea (says he) for it is written, He that eateth of the Bread, and drinketh of the Cup unworthily, eateth and drinketh doom unto himself: and I, having examined myself, see that I am not worthy.

When then wilt thou be worthy (will he who thus speaks hear from us) when wilt thou present thyself to Christ? for if thou art always going to be scared away by thy stumblings, thou wilt never cease from stumbling (for who can understand his errors? as saith the holy Psalmist) and wilt be found wholly without participation of that wholly-preserving sanctification. Decide then to lead a holier life, in harmony with the law, and so receive the Blessing, believing that it hath power to expel, not death only, but the diseases in us. For Christ thus coming to be in us lulleth the law which rageth in the members of the flesh, and kindleth piety to God-ward, and deadeneth our passions, not imputing to us the transgressions in which we are, but rather, healing us, as sick. For He bindeth up that which was crushed, He raiseth what had fallen, as a Good Shepherd and One that hath laid down His Life for His sheep.

O sublime condescension! The Creator gives himself to his creatures for their delight. Life bestows itself on mortals as food and drink. "Come, eat my body," he exhorts us, "and drink the wine I have mingled for you. I have prepared myself as food. I have mingled myself for those who desire me. Of my own will I became flesh and have become a partaker of your flesh and blood.… Eat of me as I am life, and live, for this is what I desire.… Eat my bread, for I am the life-giving grain of the wheat, and I am the bread of life. Drink the wine I have mingled for you, for I am the draught of immortality.… I am the true vine; drink my joy, the wine that I have mingled for you.

"He that eateth My flesh, dwelleth in Me."

This He said, showing that such an one is blended with Him. Now what follows seems unconnected, unless we enquire into the sense; for, saith some one, after saying, "He that eateth My flesh, dwelleth in Me," what kind of a consequence is it to add, "As the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father"?

Yet the words harmonize perfectly. For since He continually spake of "eternal life," to prove this point He introduceth the expression, "dwelleth in Me"; for "if he dwelleth in Me, and I live, it is plain that he will live also." Then He saith, "As the living Father hath sent Me." This is an expression of comparison and resemblance, and its meaning is of this kind, "I live in like manner as the Father liveth." And that thou mayest not deem Him unbegotten, He immediately subjoineth, "by the Father," not by this to show that He needeth, in order to live, any power working in Him, for He said before, to remove such a suspicion, "As the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son also to have life in Himself"; now if He needeth the working of another, it will be found that either the Father hath not given Him so to have it, and so the assertion is false, or if He hath so given it, then He will need no other one to support Him. What then means the, "By the Father"? He here merely hinteth at the cause, and what He saith is of this kind: "As the Father liveth, so I live, and he that eateth Me shall live by Me." And the "life" of which He speaketh is not life merely, but the excellent life; for that He spake not simply of life, but of that glorious and ineffable life, is clear from this. For all men "live," even unbelievers, and uninitiated, who eat not of that flesh. Seest thou that the words relate not to this life, but to that other? And what He saith is of this kind: "He that eateth My flesh, when he dieth shall not perish nor suffer punishment"; He spake not of the general resurrection, (for all alike rise again,) but concerning the special, the glorious Resurrection, that which hath a reward.

(Hom. xlvii. 1) Or, having given a promise of eternal life to those that eat Him, He says this to confirm it: He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, dwelleth in Me, and I in him.

Here we learn the mystery of Communion. He who eats and drinks the Flesh and Blood of the Lord abides in the Lord Himself, and the Lord in him. A strange and incomprehensible union takes place, so that God abides in us and we in God. You do not hear a fearsome teaching. We do not partake of God Himself, for He is intangible and incorporeal, and cannot be grasped either by eyes or by teeth; nor again do we partake of the Flesh of a mere man, for it can bring no benefit. But since God by an ineffable commingling united Flesh with Himself, the Flesh also gives life — not because it has changed into the Divine Nature, no, but after the likeness of iron heated in fire, which remains iron yet manifests the power of fire. So too the Flesh of the Lord, while remaining Flesh, gives life as the Flesh of God the Word.

Now our Lord proves that this spiritual food has such power, that is, to give eternal life. And he reasons this way: Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood is united to me, but whoever is united to me has eternal life: therefore, whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. Here he does three things: first, he gives his major premise; secondly, the minor premise, which he proves (v 58); and thirdly, he draws his conclusion: This is the bread that has come down from heaven.

We should note, with respect to the first, that if his statement, He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him, is referred to his flesh and blood in a mystical way, there is no difficulty. For, as was said, that person eats in a spiritual way, in reference to what is signified only, who is incorporated into the mystical body through a union of faith and love. Through love, God is in man, and man is in God: "He who abides in love, abides in God, and God in him" (1 Jn 4:16). And this is what the Holy Spirit does; so it is also said, "We know that we abide in God and God in us, because he has given us his Spirit" (1 Jn 4:13).

If these words are referred to a sacramental reception, then whoever eats this flesh and drinks this blood abides in God. For, as Augustine says, there is one way of eating this flesh and drinking this blood such that he who eats and drinks abides in Christ and Christ in him. This is the way of those who eat the body of Christ and drink his blood not just sacramentally, but really. And there is another way by which those who eat do not abide in Christ nor Christ in them. This is the way of those who approach [the sacrament] with an insincere heart: for this sacrament has no effect in one who is insincere. There is insincerity when the interior state does not agree with what is outwardly signified. In the sacrament of the Eucharist, what is outwardly signified is that Christ is united to the one who receives it, and such a one to Christ. Thus, one who does not desire this union in his heart, or does not try to remove every obstacle to it, is insincere. Consequently, Christ does not abide in him nor he in Christ.

"As the living Father hath sent me," saith He, "and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me." He says not: As I eat the Father, and live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same shall live by me. For the Son, who was begotten equal, does not become better by participation of the Father; just as we are made better by participation of the Son, through the unity of His body and blood, which thing that eating and drinking signifies. We live then by Him, by eating Him; that is, by receiving Himself as the eternal life, which we did not have from ourselves. Himself, however, lives by the Father, being sent by Him, because "He emptied Himself, being made obedient even unto the death of the cross." For if we take this declaration, "I live by the Father," according to that which He says in another place, "The Father is greater than I;" just as we, too, live by Him who is greater than we; this results from His being sent. The sending is in fact the emptying of Himself, and His taking upon Him the form of a servant: and this is rightly understood, while also the Son's equality of nature with the Father is preserved. For the Father is greater than the Son as man, but He has the Son as God equal,-whilst the same is both God and man, Son of God and Son of man, one Christ Jesus. To this effect, if these words are rightly understood, He spoke thus: "As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me:" just as if He were to say, My emptying of myself (in that He sent me) effected that I should live by the Father; that is, should refer my life to Him as the greater; but that any should live by me is effected by that participation in which he eats me. Therefore, I being humbled, do live by the Father, man being raised up, liveth by me. But if it was said, "I live by the Father," so as to mean, that He is of the Father, not the Father of Him, it was said without detriment to His equality. And yet further, by saying, "And he that eateth me, even he shall live by me," He did not signify that His own equality was the same as our equality, but He thereby showed the grace of the Mediator.

(Tr. xxvi. s. 19) He saith not, As I eat the Father, and live by the Father, so he that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me. For the Son does not grow better by partaking of the Father, as we do by partaking of the Son, i. e. of His one body and blood, which this eating and drinking signifies. So that His saying, I live by the Father, because He is from Him, must not be understood as detracting from His equality. Nor do the words, Even he that eateth Me, the same shall live by Me, give us the equality that He has. He does not equalize, but only mediates between God and man. If, however, we understand the words, I live by the Father, in the sense of those below, My Father is greater than I, (c. 14:28) then it is as if He said, That I live by the Father, i. e. refer my life to Him, as my superior, my humiliation in my incarnation is the cause; but He who lives by Me, lives by Me by virtue of partaking of My flesh.

"As the living Father sent me": "living," by essence; "and I live because of the Father," namely because I have life from him; above in the fifth chapter: "As the Father has life in himself, so he has given to the Son also to have life in himself," and this from the Father remaining in him: below in the fourteenth chapter: "I am in the Father, and the Father is in me"; and from this the major premise is obtained: He who remains in me, etc. And from this the conclusion is drawn: "And he who eats me, he also shall live because of me": because, namely, he who remains in life by eating truly lives because of me, since, as is said below in the eleventh chapter, "I am the resurrection and the life."

CHAPTER III. That the Son is not a Partaker of Life from any other, but rather Life by Nature, as being begotten of God the Father Who is Life by Nature.

Obscure is the meaning of this passage, and enveloped in no passing difficulty: but it will not entirely attain to impenetrability: for it will be apprehended and got at by those who choose to think aright. When then the Son saith that He was sent, He signifieth His Incarnation, and nothing else. And when we speak of His Incarnation, we mean that He was made Man complete. As then the Father (He saith) hath made Me Man, and since I God the Word, was begotten Life of That which is by Nature Life, and, made Man, have filled My Temple, that is, My Body, with Mine Own Nature; in like manner shall he also who eateth My Flesh live because of Me. For I took mortal Flesh: but, having dwelt in it, being by Nature Life, because I am of the Living Father, I re-elemented it wholly into Mine Own Life, I have not been overcome of the corruption of the flesh but have rather overcome it, as God. As then (for again I will say it shrinking not for profits sake) although I was made (He says) Flesh (for this the being sent meaneth), I live again because of the Living Father, that is, retaining in Myself the natural excellence of Him That begat Me, so he too who, by the participation of My Flesh, receiveth Me in himself shall live, wholly trans-elemented entire into Me, Who am able to give life, because I am (as it were) of life-giving Root, that is God the Father. But He says that He was Incarnate by the Father, although Solomon says, Wisdom builded her an house: and the blessed Gabriel attributeth the creation of the Divine Body to the Operation of the Spirit, when he was speaking with the holy Virgin (for The Holy Ghost, he says, shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee) that thou mayest again understand, that the Godhead being by Nature One, conceived of both in the Father and the Son and in the Holy Ghost,----not severally will Each in-work as to ought of things that are, but whatever is said to be done by One, this is wholly the work of the whole Divine Nature. For since the Holy Trinity is One in respect of consubstantiality, one full surely will be also Its Power in respect to every thing. For all things are of the Father through the Son in the Spirit. But what we have often said, this we will again say. For to say the same things, though it be burdensome, yet it is safe. It was the habit of our Saviour Christ for our profit to attribute those things which surpass the power suitable to man, to the Operation of the Father. For He hath humbled Himself being made Man: and since He accepted the Form of a servant, He spurneth not the measure of servants, yet will He not be excluded from doing all things with the Father. And He That begat Him worketh all things through Him, according to the Word of the Saviour Himself, The Father (He says) That dwelleth in Me, Himself doeth the works. Having then given to the dispensation of the Flesh what befits it, He attributeth to God the Father what is above man's power. For the building a Temple in the Virgin surpasseth man's power.

But our opponent will again reply: 'And in what other mode did the Son reveal what He is by Nature, or how did He show clearly that the Father is greater, save by saying, I live because of the Father? For if the Father is the Giver of Life to the Son, who will rush on to so great stupidity as not full surely to conceive that that which partakes of life, will not be the same by nature as life or that which is mighty to quicken?'

To such things we too will array in turn the word of the truth, and opportunely say, The fool will speak folly, and |426 his heart will conceive vain things, to practise transgression, and to utter error against the Lord. For what can be more wicked than such a conception of the heretics? How is not the deepest error uttered by them against Christ who quickeneth all things, since those most foolish ones blush not to say, that He lives by partaking of life from another, just like His creatures? Will then the Son at last be a creature too, inasmuch as it is a partaker of life, but is not very life by nature? for the creature must needs be wholly other than that which is the life in it. But if they suppose that they may be the same, let them call every creature life. But I do not suppose that any one in his senses would do that. Therefore neither is the Only-Begotten a creature, but will be conceived of as by Nature Life: for how would He be true in saying, I am the Resurrection and the Life? for life is that which gives life, not that which needs to receive it from another, just as wisdom too is understood to be that which can make wise, not that which receives wisdom. Therefore according to you the Truth will be false, and Christ will not be true, Who says, I am the Life. Yea and the brilliant choir of saints again will speak falsely, uttering words through the Spirit, and calling the Only-Begotten Life. For the Divine Psalmist is found saying to the Father, With Thee is the Fountain of Life. And the wondrous Evangelist John in his epistles thus says, That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we beheld, and our hands handled, of the Word of Life: and the Word was manifested, and we have seen and bear witness and declare unto you the Eternal Life, Which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us. Seest thou that the Psalmist speaks true, even by the testimony of John, when he says to God the Father of all, With Thee is the Fountain of Life? For the Son was and is with Him the Fountain of Life. For that the Spirit-clad says these things of Him, he will again prove by his words: for he thus writes, And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know Him That is True, and we are in His True Son Jesus Christ. This is the True God and Eternal Life. Then who (tell me) will any longer endure the trifling of the heretics? or who will not justly cry out against their impiety, in daring to say that the Son is partaker of life from another, albeit the holy and God-inspired Scripture says no such thing of Him; but rather openly cries aloud, that He is both God by Nature, and Very, and the Fountain of Life, and again Life Eternal. For how will He be conceived of as Very God, who needs life from another, and is not rather Himself Life by Nature? or how will He any more be called Fountain of Life, if He is holpen by another's gifts to be able to live?

But yea (says the opponent) we grant that the Son is so far Life, that He too can quicken, as having in Himself the Living Father.

Yet this will not suffice, most noble sirs, to exempt you from blasphemy against the Only-Begotten: but in this too shall your argument be proved untutored and every way falling to pieces. For to have to say that the Son is called Life, because He can quicken things recipient of life, by reason He has in Himself the Father, how is it not replete with unmeasured folly? For ye know not (it seems) what by nature means, or what 'being of any thing by nature means as compared with so being by circumstances. As fire is hot by nature, and other things too are hot, by partaking of its operation, as iron or wood: but not because they are heated, are they said to be fire: for they have an external and not a physical operation in them. But our argument will proceed by means of illustrations in regard to ourselves too. Grammar for instance, or Geometry, are held to be species of reasoning science, but when any one becomes skilled in grammar or the other, he is not himself conceived of as Grammar or Geometry, but from the Grammar that is in him, he is called a Grammarian, and similarly with regard to the other: so too that which is by nature life, is something altogether different from the things wherein it is, transfashioning to itself what is not so by nature. When therefore ye say that the Father is in the Son, as He might be in matter (for instance), in order that, since He is Life by Nature, He too may be able to quicken, ye foolishly grant still that He is Life, and not rather participant of it from another, yet by relation, and not by Essence called to the dignity of a dispenser thereof. And as one would not reasonably call the heated iron fire, albeit it has the operation of the fire, in that it is heated from it: or again a man skilful in grammar is not called grammar, because he can lead others also unto the science, so I do not imagine that any man of sense would call the Son Life because He can quicken others also, though He have not by Nature, according to them, the being Life, but as from the engrafted Operation of the Father, or by reason of the indwelling Father. For what (tell me) is to hinder us at last from conceiving of the Son as one of us, that is, of corruptible nature, if He live because of the Father, that is, having received the gift of life from the Father, as they understand it? For He would perish, according to the analogy of their notions, if He had not the living Father in Himself. And if we confess that He speaks truly, I am in the Father and the Father in Me; He indeed has in Himself the Father Who is Life by Nature, and is Himself in the Father though not Life by Nature. I pass over the blasphemy, though one must utter it to convict the fighters against God of their impiety: for the Father will be found to have in Himself that which is destitute of Life, that is, decay, or a decaying nature. For since the nature of the matter in hand compels us so to conceive of the Son, we must investigate further, and go through various considerations, since our aim is by due precision to refine the question. You say that God the Father is by Nature Life. Well, so He is, but He is in the Son also. For this your argument too allows. I would now with reason ask you, desiring to learn it, 'What will He work in respect of His Son, being in Him? Will He impart of His Own Life to His Offspring, as though He needed it and had not Life of Himself? how then must we not suppose the Son to be void of Life? That which is void of Life, what is it, but subject to decay? But He will not impart of His Own Life to His Offspring: for He is Life, even though He receive it not from Him.

How then do certain unguardedly babbling still accuse Him, and say that the Son therefore lives, because He hath in Himself the Father who is by Nature Life? For if He live also apart from the Father, as being Essentially Life's Very self, He will never live because of the Father, that is, because of participation of the Father. But if He have the Father the giver of His Own Life, manifestly He has no Life of His Own. For He borrows it of another, and is (as we said at first) a creature rather than Life, and of a nature subject to decay. How then does He call Himself Life? For either we too may safely say, I am the Life, or if this be no safe word (for it is not lawful for the creature to mount up to God-befitting dignities), the Son knows that He is by Nature Life: since how will He be the Impress of the Person of Him That begat Him, how the Image and accurate Likeness? or how was not Philip right in saying, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us? For in truth one ought to consider, that he that had seen the Son, had not yet seen the Father, since the One is by Nature Life, the Other participant of life from Him. For one will never see that which quickeneth in that which is quickened, Him That lacketh not in him that lacketh. Hence in another way too will He be untrue in saying, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.

But he who loveth the pious doctrines of the Church sees what great absurdities will follow their pratings. Let him then turn from them, and pass away, as it is written, and let him make straight paths, and direct his ways, and look to the simple beauty of the truth, believing that God the Father is by Nature Life, the Son Begotten of Him Life too. For as He is said to be Light of Light, so too Life of Life: and as God the Father lighteneth things lacking Light by His Own Light, His Son, and gives wisdom to things recipient thereof, through His Own Wisdom, and strengthened things needing strength, through again His Own Strength, so too He quickeneth things whatever lack the Life from Him, by His Own Life which floweth forth from Him, His Son. When then He says, I live because of the Father, do not suppose that He confesses that He lives because He receives Life from the Father, but asserted that because He was begotten of a Living Father, that therefore He also lives. For it were impossible that He who is of a Living Father, should not live. As though any of us were to say, I am a reasonable man on account of my father, for I was born the child of a reasonable man: so do thou conceive in respect of the Only-Begotten also. I live (He says) because of the Father. For since the Father who begat Me is Life by Nature, and I am His Natural and Proper Offspring, I gain by Nature what is His, i. e., being Life: for this the Father too is. For since He is conceived to be and is One of One (for the Son is from the Father, even though He were with Him eternally); He with reason glories in the Natural Attributes of Him That begat Him, as His Own.

All things that the Father has are the Son's. On the other hand, all that belongs to the Son is the Father's. Nothing then is unique to either one, because all things are in common. For their being [essence] itself is common and equal, even though the Son receives it from the Father. It is in this respect … that it is said, "I live by the Father," not as though his life and being were kept together by the Father but because he has his being from him beyond all time and beyond all cause.

Can lifeless copies be put on a level with their living originals? Can painted or carved or molten effigies be put on a level with the nature that they imitate? The Son is not the image of the Father after such a fashion as this; he is the living image of the Living. The Son who is born of the Father has a nature in no way different from his. And, because his nature is not different, he possesses the power of the nature that is the same as his own. The fact that he is the image proves that God the Father is the author of the birth of the Only Begotten, who is himself revealed as the likeness and image of the invisible God. And hence the likeness, which is joined in union with the divine nature, is indelibly his own because the powers of that nature are inalienably his own.

So then he lives through the Father, and just as he lives through the Father we live through his flesh. For all comparison is chosen to shape our understanding so that we may grasp the subject we are treating with the help of the analogy set before us. Christ dwelling within our carnal selves through the flesh is the reason we have life, and we shall live through him in the same way as he lives through the Father. If, then, we live naturally through him according to the flesh, that is, if we have partaken of the nature of his flesh, must not Christ naturally have the Father within himself according to the Spirit since he himself lives through the Father? And he lives through the Father because his birth has not implanted in him an alien and different nature. This is because his very being is from the Father yet is not divided from the Father by any barrier of an unlikeness of nature because within himself he has the Father through the birth in the power of the nature.

(Hom. xlvi) And because I live, it is manifest that he will live also: As the living Father hath sent Me, and I lice by the Father, even so he that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me. (Aug. de Verb. Dom. [Nic.]). As if He said, As the Father liveth, so do I live; adding, lest you should think Him unbegotten, By the Father, meaning that He has His source in the Father. He that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me; the life here meant is not life simply, but the justified life: for even unbelievers live, who never eat of that flesh at all. Nor is it of the general resurrection He speaks, (for all will rise again,) but of the resurrection to glory, and reward.

As I, He says, live by the Father (that is, because I was born from the Father, Who is Life), so also the one who eats Me shall live by Me, having been united with and as it were transformed into Me, Who am able to give life. But when you hear that "I live," do not think that He lives by participation in life. Otherwise an animal would be called God. But no! For neither is an animal called God, nor is a created thing called Life.

Now he presents his minor premise, that is, whoever is united to Christ has life. He mentions this to show the following similarity: the Son, because of the unity he has with the Father, receives life from the Father; therefore one who is united to Christ receives life from Christ. And this is what he says: Just as the living Father has sent me, and I live because of the Father. These words can be explained in two ways about Christ: either in reference to his human nature, or in reference to his divine nature.

If they are explained as referring to Christ the Son of God, then the "as" implies a similarity of Christ to creatures in some respect, though not in all respects, which is, that he exists from another. For to be from another is common to Christ the Son of God and to creatures. But they are unlike in another way: the Son has something proper to himself, because he is from the Father in such a way that he receives the entire fulness of the divine nature, so that whatever is natural to the Father is also natural to the Son. Creatures, on the other hand, receive a certain particular perfection and nature. "Just as the Father possesses life in himself, so he has given it to the Son to have life in himself" (above 5:26). He shows this because, when speaking of his procession from the Father, he does not say: "As I eat the Father and I live because of the Father," as he said, when speaking of sharing in his body and blood, whoever eats me, he also will live because of me. This eating makes us better, for eating implies a certain sharing. Rather, Christ says that he lives because of the Father, not as eaten, but as generating, without detriment to his equality.

If we explain this statement as applying to Christ as man, then in some respect the "as" implies a similarity between Christ as man and us: that is, in the fact that as Christ the man receives spiritual life through union with God, so we too receive spiritual life in the communion or sharing in this Sacrament. Still, there is a difference: for Christ as man received life through union with the Word, to whom he is united in person; while we are united to Christ through the sacrament of faith. And so he says two things: sent me and Father. If we refer these words to the Son of God, then he is saying, I live because of the Father, because the Father himself is living. But if they are referred to the Son of Man, then he is saying, I live because of the Father, because the Father has sent me, i.e., made me incarnate. For the sending of the Son is his incarnation: "God sent his Son, made from a woman" (Gal 4:4).

According to Hilary, this is a rejection of the error made by Arius. For if we live because of Christ, because we have something of his nature (as he says, "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life"), then Christ too lives because of the Father, because he has in himself the nature of the Father (not a part of it, for it is simple and indivisible). Therefore, Christ has the entire nature of the Father. It is because of the Father, therefore, that the Son lives, because the Son's birth did not involve another and different nature [from that of the Father].

"This is the bread that cometh down from heaven;" that by eating it we may live, since we cannot have eternal life from ourselves. "Not," saith He, "as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth this bread shall live forever." That those fathers are dead, He would have to be understood as meaning, that they do not live forever. For even they who eat Christ shall certainly die temporally; but they live forever, because Christ is eternal life.

(Tr. xxvi. c. 20) That we who cannot obtain eternal life of ourselves, might live by the eating that bread, He descended from heaven: This is the bread which cometh down from heaven.

(Tr. xxvi. 20) The death here meant is death eternal. For even those who eat Christ are subject to natural death; but they live for ever, because Christ is everlasting life.

And to show the wide interval between the shadow and the light, the type and the reality, He adds, Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

Here the dignity of the refreshment is touched upon, which surpasses that refreshment of the fathers which the Jews were praising above, both because it is nobler and because it is more lasting: nobler, because this bread is from heaven: whence he says: "This is the bread that descended from heaven": above in the same chapter: "Moses did not give you bread from heaven, but my Father gives you bread from heaven," and thus it is nobler. It is also more lasting, because that bread preserved temporally, but this one eternally; whence he says: "Not as your fathers ate manna and died," and thus were preserved only temporally, because within forty years they died in the desert, according to that verse of the Psalm: "For forty years I was offended with that generation"; Numbers chapter fourteen: "Your children shall wander in the desert for forty years and shall bear your fornication, until the corpses of the fathers are consumed in the desert." But this bread preserves eternally: whence he says: "He who eats this bread shall live forever": that is, he who eats worthily "shall live forever," because, as is said in First Corinthians chapter eleven, "he who eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment upon himself": he who eats worthily shall live forever. He frequently promises eternal life, both so that they may desire that food and so that he may draw them away from love of earthly life to eternal life. For as is said in Matthew chapter ten: "He who loves his soul more than me is not worthy of me"; Deuteronomy chapter thirty: "Choose life for yourself."

An inquiry is made concerning the dignity of this eating. For he says that those eating this bread will not die, as those eating manna. He either understands this of spiritual life or of bodily life. If of spiritual life, he says nothing, because the holy fathers who ate manna did not die spiritually. If of bodily life, likewise: because he who eats this bread does not live bodily, but dies.

It must be said that this food is set above that food by reason of giving life in two ways: first, because that food could not give life except through this one which it signified; therefore it is said of the just that "they all ate the same spiritual food," 1 Corinthians 10; but those who had their eye only on that food died spiritually, because they tasted it only in a carnal manner. So Augustine responds. In another way it can be said that manna was ordained for the preservation of bodily life, but this bread for the preservation of spiritual life. And the Lord means to say that that bread only sustained bodily life for a time, but this bread sustains spiritual life forever in those who receive it worthily; and therefore it is more worthy than that one.

But those who receive unworthily sin, and the bread is turned into poison for them, and these are those who bear the sting of mortal sin. The reason why they sin is contempt, because they bring so great a guest into so vile a lodging. But how it is received worthily, Augustine teaches: "Bring innocence," he says, "to the altar; if there be daily sins, at least let them not be deadly. Before you approach the altar, let it be said: Forgive us our debts, etc. Then approach with confidence: it is bread, not poison."

As the prayer goes forward, we ask and say, "Give us this day our daily bread." And this may be understood both spiritually and literally, because either way of understanding it is rich in divine usefulness to our salvation. For Christ is the bread of life; and this bread does not belong to all men, but it is ours. And according as we say, "Our Father," because He is the Father of those who understand and believe; so also we call it "our bread," because Christ is the bread of those who are in union with His body. And we ask that this bread should be given to us daily, that we who are in Christ, and daily receive the Eucharist for the food of salvation, may not, by the interposition of some heinous sin, by being prevented, as withheld and not communicating, from partaking of the heavenly bread, be separated from Christ's body, as He Himself predicts, and warns, "I am the bread of life which came down from heaven. If any man eat of my bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread which I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world." When, therefore, He says, that whoever shall eat of His bread shall live for ever; as it is manifest that those who partake of His body and receive the Eucharist by the right of communion are living, so, on the other hand, we must fear and pray lest any one who, being withheld from communion, is separate from Christ's body should remain at a distance from salvation; as He Himself threatens, and says, "Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, ye shall have no life in you." And therefore we ask that our bread-that is, Christ-may be given to us daily, that we who abide and live in Christ may not depart from His sanctification and body.

Great (saith He) ought to be the effects of great things, and the gifts of the Grace from above, should appear God-befitting and worthy of the Divine Munificence. For if thou have wholly received in faith that the Bread came, down from heaven, let it produce continous life in them that long after it, and have the unceasing Operation of immortality. For this will be a clear proof of its being the Bread from heaven, that is from God: since we say that it befits the Eternal to give what is eternal, and not the enjoyment of temporary food, which is barely able to last for just the least moment. For one will no longer wisely suppose that that was the bread from God and from above, which our forefathers eating, were overcome by death, and repelled not the evil of corruption, and no wonder; for that was not the Bread which availeth to render immortal. Hence neither will it be rightly conceived and said by any to be from heaven. For it was a work befitting that which came down thence, to render the partakers of It superior to death and decay. By undoubted proof again will it be confirmed, that this was the Bread from Heaven, that to wit through Christ, i. e., His Body. For It makes him that tastes thereof to live for ever. Herein too is seen a great pledge of the Divine Nature, Which vouchsafes not to give a little thing, but everything wonderful, even surpassing our understanding, so as for the greatness of the Grace, to be even disbelieved by the more simple. For with so wealthy a Hand how should not the Will to give largely be present? Wherefore Paul too says in amazement, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God prepared for them that love Him. By little examples was the Law typifying great ones, having the shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things, as it is written: as in the food of manna is seen the Blessing that is through Christ. For the shadow of the good things to come was prefigured to them of old.

(de Trin. x. c. 18.) He calls Himself the bread, because He is the origin of His own body. And lest it should be thought that the virtue and nature of the Word had given way to the flesh, He calls the bread His flesh, that, inasmuch as the bread came down from heaven, it might be seen that His body was not of human conception, but a heavenly body. To say that the bread is His own, is to declare that the Word assumed His body Himself.

"This is that bread which came down from heaven; not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead; he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever."

Continually doth He handle the same point, so as to imprint it on the understanding of the hearers, (for the teaching on these points was a kind of final teaching,) and to confirm the doctrine of the Resurrection and of eternal life. Wherefore He mentioneth the Resurrection since He promiseth eternal life, showing that that life is not now, but after the Resurrection. "And whence," saith some one, "are these things clear?" From the Scriptures; to them He everywhere referreth the Jews, bidding them learn these things from them. And by saying, "Which giveth life to the world," He inciteth them to jealousy, that from very vexation that others should enjoy the gift, they may not stay without. And continually He remindeth them of the manna, showing the difference, (between it and His bread,) and guiding them to the faith; for if He was able to support their life for forty years without harvest, or corn, or other things in course; much more now will He be able to do so, as having come for greater ends. Moreover, if those things were but types, and yet men collected what came down without sweat or labor; much more shall this be the case, where the difference is great both in the never dying, and in the enjoying the true life. And rightly hath He spoken often of "life," since this is desired by men, and nothing is so pleasing to them as not to die. Since even under the old Covenant, this was the promise, length of life and many days, but now it is not length merely, but life having no end. He desireth at the same time to show, that He now revoketh the punishment caused by sin, annulling that sentence which condemneth to death, and bringing in not life merely, but life eternal, contrariwise to the former things.

(Hom. xlvii. 1) For if it was possible without harvest or fruit of the earth, or any such thing, to preserve the lives of the Israelites of old for forty years, much more will He be able to do this with that spiritual food, of which the manna is the type. He knew how precious a thing life was in men's eyes, and therefore repeats His promise of life often; just as the Old Testament had done; (Exod. 20:12) only that it only offered length of life, He life without end. (Deut. 22:7) This promise was an abolition of that sentence of death, which sin had brought upon us. These things said He in the synagogue, as He taught in Capernaum; (1 Kings 3:14) where many displays of His power took place. (Ps. 21:4; 91:16) He taught in the synagogue and in the temple, (Prov. 3:2) with the view of attracting the multitude, and as a sign that He was not acting in opposition to the Father.

All the angels on high marvel at the affairs of earth For earth-born men dwelling here below Are exalted in spirit and reach what is on high As they share in Christ, crucified. For all together partake of His body, As they eagerly come to the bread of life, They hope for eternal salvation from it. Even though visibly, to all appearances, it is bread It sanctifies them spiritually because it is The heavenly bread of immortality. That the bread which we take is the flesh of the Immanuel, The Master Himself was the first to teach us; For when He voluntarily went to His Passion, Christ broke the bread of salvation, And said to His apostles, as it is written: "Now draw near; eat of this, And eating, you will receive eternal life, For this is my flesh, this food, Since really, I whom you behold, am The heavenly bread of immortality. We all know, we who possess complete faith in Christ, That as we approach, eager for the mystic bread And in addition take the cup of salvation, If we are of pure heart and without dissimulation We are all participants of the flesh and blood Of Christ with faith in Him, and we hope From this a life like that of the angels; For, in very truth, the body of the One who suffered, The very holy body of Jesus Christ is The heavenly bread of immortality.

He frequently repeats the words "your fathers ate manna in the wilderness" in order to convince His listeners that if it was possible for people to be nourished without harvest or sowing for forty years and their life was sustained, how much more will the Lord now strengthen our rational life with a better bread, His own Flesh, formed from the earth – the Virgin, without sowing – of a man. He everywhere mentions life and frequently brings up this name, because nothing is so pleasant to people as life. However, you can eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of the Master not only in the Mystical Communion, but also in another way. He who walks the path of active life eats the Flesh. For flesh is hard to digest, just as the active life is full of toil. He who contemplates drinks the Blood as wine that gladdens the heart. For contemplation is not bound up with toil; it is even a rest from toils, and is like drinking, just as drinking is easier than eating.

Next, he presents his two conclusions. For they were arguing about two things: the origin of this spiritual food and its power. The first conclusion is about its origin; the second is about its power: whoever eats this bread shall live forever.

With respect to the first, we should note that the Jews had been troubled because he had said, "I am the living bread that has come down from heaven" (v 51). Therefore, in opposition to them, he arrives at this same conclusion again, from his statement, "I live because of the Father," when he says, This is the bread that has come down from heaven. For to come down from heaven is to have an origin from heaven; but the Son has his origin from heaven, since he lives because of the Father: therefore, Christ is the one who has come down from heaven. And so he says, This is the bread that has come down from heaven, i.e., from the life of the Father. Come down, in relation to his divinity; or come down, even in his body, so far as the power that formed it, the Holy Spirit, was from heaven, a heavenly power. Thus, those who eat this bread do not die; as our fathers died, who ate the manna that was neither from heaven, nor was living bread, as was said above. How those who ate the manna died is clear from what has been mentioned before.

The second conclusion, concerning the power of this bread, is given when he says, whoever eats this bread shall live forever. This follows from his statement, "He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (v 57). For whoever eats this bread abides in me, and I in him. But I am eternal life. Therefore, whoever eats this bread, as he ought, shall live forever.

"But Jesus, knowing in Himself that His disciples murmured at it,"-for they so said these things with themselves that they might not be heard by Him: but He who knew them in themselves, hearing within Himself,-answered and said, "This offends you;" because I said, I give you my flesh to eat, and my blood to drink, this forsooth offends you.

(Tr. xxvii. 3) They spoke, however, so as not to be heard by Him. But He, who knew what was in them, heard within Himself: When Jesus knew within Himself that His disciples murmured at it, He said unto them, Doth this offend you?

Here the explanation of the doctrine on account of the murmuring is touched upon: and although the murmuring was in secret, yet it did not escape the Lord: whence he says: "But Jesus knowing in himself that his disciples murmured about this": he knew this not by report, but "in himself": below in chapter sixteen: "The disciples said: Now we know that you know all things, and it is not necessary for anyone to question you." Knowing therefore the murmuring and wishing to cut it off, he explains that what he had said is not to be understood carnally, but spiritually. He shows therefore that it is not to be understood carnally, both because it would be false, and because it would be useless. Therefore "he said to them: Does this scandalize you," namely what I said about the eating of my flesh, because you believe carnally that it is to be divided into pieces: just as the Pharisees, in Matthew chapter fifteen: "Do you know that the Pharisees, having heard this word, were scandalized?" And this is false.

"When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples murmured at it," (for this is an attribute of His Godhead to bring secret things to light,) "He said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before?"

This also He doth in the case of Nathanael, saying, "Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig-tree, believest thou? Thou shall see greater things than these." And to Nicodemus, "No man hath ascended up to heaven but the Son of man which is in heaven." What then, doth He add difficulties to difficulties? No, (that be far from Him,) but by the greatness of the doctrines, and the number of them, He desireth to bring them over. For if one had said simply, "I have come down from heaven," and added nothing more, he would have been the more likely to offend them; but He who said, "My body is the life of the world"; He who said, "As the living Father hath sent Me, so I live by the Father"; and who said, "I have come down from heaven," solves the difficulty. For the man who utters any one great thing concerning himself may perhaps be suspected of feigning, but he who connects together so many one after another removes all suspicion. All that He doth and saith is intended to lead them away from the thought, that Joseph was His father. And it was not with a wish to strengthen, but rather to do away that stumbling-block, that He said this. For whosoever deemed that He was Joseph's son could not receive His sayings, while one that was persuaded that He had come down from heaven, and would ascend thither, might more easily give heed to His words...

Wishing to show them that from Him as God the thoughts of their hearts are in no way hidden, He says: "Does this offend you?"

After our Lord put an end to the complaining and arguing among the Jews, he now removes the scandal given to his disciples. First, we see the scandal of those disciples who left him; secondly, the devotion of those who remained with him (v 68). Concerning the first, he does three things: first, we see the scandal given to his disciples; secondly, the kindly way Christ takes it away (v 62); and thirdly, the stubbornness and unbelief of those who leave him (v 67).

We should note, with respect to the first, that there were many Jews who adhered to Christ, believed him and followed him. And although they had not left all things as the Twelve did, they were still all called his disciples. It is of these that he says, many, that is, many of the people who believed him, on hearing this, what he had said above, said, This is a hard saying! We read of these: "They believe for a while, and in the time of testing fall away" (Lk 8:13). He says, many, because "The number of fools is infinite" (Ecc 1:15); and, "Many are called but few are chosen" (Mt 20:16).

They said: This is a hard saying! Now that is said to be hard which is difficult to divide, and which offers resistance. Accordingly, a saying is hard either because it resists the intellect or because it resists the will, that is, when we cannot understand it with our mind, or when it does not please our will. And this saying was hard for them in both ways. It was hard for their intellects because it exceeded the weakness of their intellects: for since they were earthly minded, they were incapable of understanding what he said, namely, that he would give them his flesh to eat. And it was hard for their wills, because he said many things about the power of his divinity: and although they believed him as a prophet, they did not believe that he was God. Consequently, it seemed to them that he was making himself greater than he was. "His letters are strong" (2 Cor 10:10), "Wisdom is exceedingly unpleasant to the unlearned" (Sir 21). And so it reads on. Who can accept it? They said this as an excuse: for since they had given themselves to him, they should have accepted what he said. But because he was not teaching them things that were pleasing to them, they were waiting for an occasion to leave him: "A fool does not accept words of wisdom unless You tell him what he desires" (Prv 18:2).

"Then what if ye shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before?" What is this? Did He hereby solve the question that perplexed them? Did He hereby uncover the source of their offense? He did clearly, if only they understood. For they supposed that He was going to deal out His body to them; but He said that He was to ascend into heaven, of course, whole: "When ye shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before;" certainly then, at least, you will see that not in the manner you suppose does He dispense His body; certainly then, at least, you will understand that His grace is not consumed by tooth-biting.

And He said, "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing." Before we expound this, as the Lord grants us, that other must not be negligently passed over, where He says, "Then what if ye shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before?" For Christ is the Son of man, of the Virgin Mary. Therefore Son of man He began to be here on earth, where He took flesh from the earth. For which cause it was said prophetically, "Truth is sprung from the earth." Then what does He mean when He says, "When ye shall see the Son of man ascending where He was before"? For there had been no question if He had spoken thus: "If ye shall see the Son of God ascending where He was before." But since He said, "The Son of man ascending where He was before," surely the Son of man was not in heaven before the time when He began to have a being on earth? Here, indeed, He said, "where He was before," just as if He were not there at this time when He spoke these words. But in another place He says, "No man has ascended into heaven but He that came down from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven." He said not "was," but, saith He, "the Son of man who is in heaven." He was speaking on earth, and He declared Himself to be in heaven. And yet He did not speak thus: "No man hath ascended into heaven but He that came down from heaven," the Son of God, "who is in heaven." Whither tends it, but to make us understand that which even in the former discourse I commended to your minds, my beloved, that Christ, both God and man, is one person, not two persons, lest our faith be not a trinity, but a quaternity? Christ, therefore, is one; the Word, soul and flesh, one Christ; the Son of God and Son of man, one Christ; Son of God always, Son of man in time, yet one Christ in regard to unity of person. In heaven He was when He spoke on earth. He was Son of man in heaven in that manner in which He was Son of God on earth; Son of God on earth in the flesh which He took, Son of man in heaven in the unity of person.

Or, these words are an answer to their mistake. They supposed that He was going to distribute His body in bits: whereas He tells them now, that He should ascend to heaven whole and entire: What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where He was before? ye will then see that He does not distribute His body in the way ye think. Again; Christ became the Son of man, of the Virgin Mary here upon earth, and took flesh upon Him: He says then, What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where He was before? to let us know that Christ, God and man, is one person, not two; and the object of one faith, not a quaternity, but a Trinity. He was the Son of man in heaven, as He was Son of God upon earth; the Son of God upon earth by assumption of the flesh, the Son of man in heaven, by the unity of the person.

"If then you shall see the Son of man ascending where he was before" — the construction is incomplete — then you will know that the flesh is not to be divided into pieces, because the whole Christ will be entire in heaven: Augustine: "He is whole and entire in heaven; he remains entire under the Sacrament, he remains entire in your heart."

Not only was their understanding false, but useless.

A question is raised about what he says: "If you shall see the Son of Man ascending where he was before." This cannot be said according to the human nature, because according to that nature he was not in heaven before: similarly neither according to the divine nature, because according to that nature he was still in heaven when he was speaking: hence above in chapter 3: "No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven."

It must be said that this was said by comparing the Son of God according to the divine nature after the assumption of the flesh, in which it appeared to be humbled, to itself before the assumption: because then he could not be thought of as weak. It is therefore the same as if he were to say: if you shall see the Son of Man ascend, that is, be so greatly glorified that he is believed to be equal to the Father.

Doth this offend you? what and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before?

From utter ignorance, certain of those who were being taught by Christ the Saviour, were offended at His words. For when they heard Him saying, Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink His Blood, ye have no life in you, they supposed that they were invited to some brutish savageness, as though they were enjoined to eat flesh and to sup up blood, and were constrained to do things- which are dreadful even to hear. For they knew not the beauty of the Mystery, and that fairest economy devised for it. Besides this, they full surely reasoned thus with themselves, How can the human body implant in us everlasting life, what can a thing of like nature with ourselves avail to immortality? Christ therefore understanding their thoughts (for all things are naked and, bared to His eyes), heals them again, leading them by the hand manifoldly to the understanding of those things of which they were yet ignorant. Very foolishly, sirs, (saith He) are ye offended at My Words. For if ye cannot yet believe, albeit oftentimes instructed, that My Body will infuse life into you, how will ye feel (He saith) when ye shall see It ascend even into heaven? For not only do I promise that I will ascend even into heaven itself, that ye may not again say, How? but the sight shall be in your eyes, shaming every gainsayer. If then ye shall see (saith He) the Son of Man ascending into heaven, what will ye say then? For ye will be convicted of no slight folly. For if ye suppose that My Flesh cannot put life into you, how can It ascend into heaven like a bird? For if It cannot quicken, because its nature is not to quicken, how will It soar in air, how mount up into the heavens? for this too is equally impossible for flesh. But if it ascends contrary to nature, what is to hinder it from quickening also, even though its nature be not to quicken, of its own nature? For He Who made That heavenly which is from earth, will render it Lifegiving also, oven though its nature be to decay, as regards its own self?

Wo must observe how He doth not endure to be divided into two christs, according to the uncounsel of some. For He keepeth Himself every way undivided after the Incarnation. For He says that the Son of man ascendeth up where He was before, although the earthly Body was not above before this, but only the Word by Itself before His Concurrence with flesh. Well then hath Paul put in his epistles, One Lord Jesus Christ. For He is One Son, both before the Incarnation and after the Incarnation, and we do not reckon His own Body as alien from the Word. Wherefore He says that the Word which came down from above from heaven is also Son of Man. For He was made Flesh, as the blessed Evangelist saith, and did not pass into flesh by change (for He is without turning and Unchangeable by Nature as God) but as it were dwelling in His own Temple, I mean that from the Virgin, and made Man in very deed. But by saying that He will ascend up where He was before also, He gives His hearers to understand that He hath come down from heaven. For thus it was like that they understanding the force of the argument, should give heed to Him not as to a man only, but should at length know that He is God the Word in the Flesh, and believe that His Body too is Life-giving.

What then, if you see Me, in the appearance of the Son of Man, ascending into heaven, where I was before as God? For One and the Same ascends as Man to where He was before as God. He said this in order to draw them away from the opinion of Him as the son of Joseph. For whoever believed that He was formerly in heaven would undoubtedly also believe that He is the Son not of Joseph, but of God, and would ultimately believe His words as well. Hearing that the Son of Man was formerly in heaven, do not think that the body descended from heaven (so the heresiarchs Marcellus and Apollinarius idly talk), but since one and the same was the Son of Man and God the Word, then, as we have said, it is said that He ascends as Man to where He was formerly as God.

Do not suppose from this that the body of Christ came down from heaven, as the heretics Marcion and Apollinarius say; but only that the Son of God and the Son of man are one and the same.

Next, we see the kindly way Christ dispelled their difficulty. First, he takes notice of it; secondly, he removes its cause (v 63); and thirdly, he mentions what the cause was (v 65).

He had noticed that they were scandalized because they had said, although privately, so he could not hear, This is a hard saying! But Christ, who in virtue of his divinity knew that they had said this, mentions it. And this is what he says: But Jesus, knowing in himself, what they said within themselves, that is, that his disciples were grumbling about this — "He did not need anyone to give him testimony about men. He was well aware of what was in man's heart" (Jn 2:25); "God searches into the hearts and loins of men" (Ps 7:10) — said to them, Does this scandalize you? As if to say: You should not be scandalized at this. Or, it can be understood less strongly, as meaning: I know that you are scandalized at this. "He will be our sanctification," i.e., those who believe in Christ, but "a stumbling-stone to the two houses of Israel," to the grumbling disciples and the crowds (Is 8:4).

But since teachers should avoid creating difficulties for those who are listening to them, why did our Lord mention those things that would upset the people and have them leave? I answer that Christ had to mention such things because his teaching required it. For they had pleaded with him for material food, when he had come to strengthen their desire for spiritual food; and so he had to make known to them his teaching on spiritual food.

Nevertheless, their difficulty was not caused by any defect in what Christ was teaching, but by their own unbelief. For if they had not understood what our Lord was saying, because of their own earthly mindedness, they could have questioned him, as the apostles had done in similar circumstances. According to Augustine, however, our Lord purposely permitted this situation, to give teachers a reason for consolation and patience with those who belittle what they say, since even the disciples presumed to disparage what Christ said.

Learn now that as the Father is the Fount of life, so, too, many have stated that the Son is signified as the Fount of life. This is why he says that with you, almighty God, your Son is the Fount of life. That is the Fount of the Holy Spirit, for the Spirit is life, as the Lord says: "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life," for where the Spirit is, there also is life. And where life is, there is also the Holy Spirit.

What is it, then, that He adds? "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing." Let us say to Him (for He permits us, not contradicting Him, but desiring to know), O Lord, good Master, in what way does the flesh profit nothing, whilst Thou hast said, "Except a man eat my flesh, and drink my blood, he shall not have life in him?" Or does life profit nothing? And why are we what we are, but that we may have eternal life, which Thou dost promise by Thy flesh? Then what means "the flesh profiteth nothing"? It profiteth nothing, but only in the manner in which they understood it. They indeed understood the flesh, just as when cut to pieces in a carcass, or sold in the shambles; not as when it is quickened by the Spirit. Wherefore it is said that "the flesh profiteth nothing," in the same manner as it is said that "knowledge puffeth up." Then, ought we at once to hate knowledge? Far from it! And what means "Knowledge puffeth up"? Knowledge alone, without charity. Therefore he added, "but charity edifieth." Therefore add thou to knowledge charity, and knowledge will be profitable, not by itself, but through charity. So also here, "the flesh profiteth nothing," only when alone. Let the Spirit be added to the flesh, as charity is added to knowledge, and it profiteth very much. For if the flesh profited nothing, the Word would not be made flesh to dwell among us. If through the flesh Christ has greatly profited us, does the flesh profit nothing? But it is by the flesh that the Spirit has done somewhat for our salvation. Flesh was a vessel; consider what it held, not what it was. The apostles were sent forth; did their flesh profit us nothing? If the apostles' flesh profited us, could it be that the Lord's flesh should have profited us nothing? For how should the sound of the Word come to us except by the voice of the flesh? Whence should writing come to us? All these are operations of the flesh, but only when the spirit moves it, as if it were its organ. Therefore "it is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing," as they understood the flesh, but not so do I give my flesh to be eaten.

Hence "the words," saith He, "which I have spoken to you are Spirit and life." For we have said, brethren, that this is what the Lord had taught us by the eating of His flesh and drinking of His blood, that we should abide in Him and He in us. But we abide in Him when we are His members, and He abides in us when we are His temple. But that we may be His members, unity joins us together. And what but love can effect that unity should join us together? And the love of God, whence is it? Ask the apostle: "The love of God," saith he, "is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us." Therefore "it is the Spirit that quickeneth," for it is the Spirit that makes living members. Nor does the Spirit make any members to be living except such as it finds in the body, which also the Spirit itself quickens. For the Spirit which is in thee, O man, by which it consists that thou art a man, does it quicken a member which it finds separated from thy flesh? I call thy soul thy spirit. Thy soul quickeneth only the members which are in thy flesh; if thou takest one away, it is no longer quickened by thy soul, because it is not joined to the unity of thy body. These things are said to make us love unity and fear separation. For there is nothing that a Christian ought to dread so much as to be separated from Christ's body. For if he is separated from Christ's body, he is not a member of Christ; if he is not a member of Christ, he is not quickened by the Spirit of Christ. "But if any man," saith the apostle, "have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His." "It is the Spirit," then, "that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." What means "are spirit and life"? They are to be understood spiritually. Hast thou understood spiritually? "They are spirit and life." Hast thou understood carnally? So also "are they spirit and life," but are not so to thee.

(Tract. xxvii. s. 5) Or thus, the flesh profiteth nothing. They had understood by His flesh, as it were, of a carcase, that was to be cut up, and sold in the shambles, not of a body animated by the spirit. Join the spirit to the flesh, and it profiteth much: for if the flesh profited not, the Word would not have become flesh, and dwelt among us. The Spirit hath done much for our salvation, by means of the flesh.

For the flesh does not cleanse of itself, but by the Word who assumed it: which Word, being the principle of life in all things, having taken up soul and body, cleanseth the souls and bodies of those that believe. It is the spirit, then, that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing; i. e. the flesh as they understood it. I do not, He seems to say, give My body to be eaten in this sense. He ought not to think of the flesh carnally: The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

(Tr. xxvii) If then thou understandest them spiritually, they are life and spirit to thee: if carnally, even then they are life and spirit, but not to thee. Our Lord declares that in eating His body, and drinking His blood, we dwell in Him, and He in us. But what has the power to affect this, except love? The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, which is given to us. (Rom. 5:5)

Afterwards he showed them a higher degree of love when he said, "It is the Spirit who gives life, the flesh profits nothing." Perhaps this was also true of the Prophet who said: "A Spirit before our face is Christ the Lord." When he adds: "Under his shadow we will live among the heathens," he seems to me to speak on behalf of the beginners, in order that they may at least rest in the shade since they know they are not strong enough to bear the heat of the sun. They may be nourished by the sweetness of his humanity since they are not yet able to perceive the things which are of the Spirit of God. The shade of Christ, I suggest, is his flesh which overshadowed Mary and tempered for her the bright splendor of the Spirit. Therefore in this human devotion there is in the meantime consolation for whomever does not as yet have the Spirit which gives life. For there is no love of Christ at all without the Holy Spirit, even if this love is in the flesh, and without its fullness.

I do not mean that he who is God is not also man, for the one Christ is both God and man; I mean that all things which are good, even those of which man is the agent, really come from God rather than man. "It is the spirit," we are told, "that gives life, the flesh has nothing to offer." Hence there is a curse on the man who puts his trust in man, for although our whole hope rightly depends on God made man, it is not because he is man but because he is God.

"It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh" — that is, carnal understanding — "profits nothing"; Second Corinthians chapter three: "The letter kills, but the spirit gives life"; and therefore the words are not to be understood carnally, because they do not profit that way, but spiritually, so that they may profit. Whence "the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life," because understood spiritually they give life: whence in Hebrews chapter four: "The word of God is living and effective"; it is "living," because it gives life: whence Deuteronomy chapter eight: "Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." But they do not give life except to the one who understands spiritually; whence Augustine: "Have you understood spiritually? They are spirit and life. Have you understood carnally? They are spirit and life, but they are not so for you."

It is asked concerning what he says: "The flesh profits nothing." For if it profits nothing, then it ought not to be given for eating, nor is it truly food. On account of this, heretics say that these words must be understood spiritually, that is, not carnally; nor should it be understood that we literally receive the flesh of Christ under the Sacrament. And they say that his disciples were rebuked who thought this; whence they say that it is not in the Sacrament of the altar except as in a sign.

But they understand most poorly, because while they refuse the flesh, they flee from the truth. For even if the words of Christ are to be understood spiritually, they must nonetheless be true. On account of this it must be said that the flesh which he took from the Virgin is true food. But that which is said, that "it profits nothing," is understood in two ways: either because it profits nothing without the spirit: for just as a coal does not burn unless ignited, yet when ignited it burns, so the flesh of Christ, if it were separated from the Word, would not enkindle, but joined to the Word it is like an ignited coal. Otherwise it is answered that "the flesh profits nothing" according to carnal understanding, understanding it thus, that Christ would give his flesh by dividing it as meats in a butcher's shop, and by materially chewing it under the form of flesh. Such an understanding, I say, profits nothing; but rather that true flesh is eaten in the Sacrament without any cutting of it.

The words that I have spoken unto you, they are Spirit and are life.

He filleth whole His Own Body with the Life-giving operation of the Spirit. For He now calls the Flesh Spirit, not turning It aside from being Flesh: but because by reason of Its being perfectly united to Him, and now endued with His whole Life-giving Power, It ought to be called Spirit too. And no wonder, for be not offended at this. For if he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit, how shall not His Own Body rather be called One with Him? Something of this kind then He means in the passage before us: I perceive from your reasonings within you (saith He) that ye foolishly imagine that I am telling you, that the body of earth is of its own nature life-giving: but this is not the drift of My words. For My whole exposition to you was of the Divine Spirit and of Eternal Life,. For it is not the nature of the flesh which renders the Spirit life-giving, but the might of the Spirit maketh the Body life-giving. The words then which I have discoursed with you, are spirit, that is spiritual and of the Spirit, and are life, i. e., life-giving and of that which is by Nature Life. And not as repudiating His Own Flesh does He say these things, but as teaching us what is the truth. For what we have just said, this will we repeat for profit sake. The nature of the flesh cannot of itself quicken (for what more is there in Him That is God by Nature?) yet will it not be conceived of in Christ as Alone and by Itself: for it has united to it the Word, Which is by Nature Life. When therefore Christ calls it life-giving, He does not testify the Power of quickening to It so much, as to Himself, or to His Spirit. For because of Him is His Own Body too Life-giving, since He re-elemented It to His Own Power. But the 'how,' is neither to be apprehended by the mind, nor spoken by the tongue, but honoured in silence and faith above understanding.

But that the Son too is often called by the name of Spirit by the God-inspired Scriptures, we shall know by what is subjoined. The blessed John then writes of Him, This is He That came by water and Spirit, Jesus Christ, not by water only, but by water and the Spirit 5: and it is the Spirit That beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. Lo, he calleth the Spirit Truth, albeit Christ openly crieth out, I am the Truth. Paul again writes to us saying, They that are in the flesh cannot please God: but YE are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you, but if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. But if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Lo again herein having proved that the Spirit of God dwelleth in us, he hath said that Christ Himself is in us. For inseparable from the Son is His Spirit, according to the count of Identity of Nature, even though He be conceived of as having a Personal Existence. Therefore He often names indifferently, sometimes the Spirit, sometimes Himself.

[In this passage Christ is saying,] "It is not the nature of the flesh that renders the Spirit life-giving but the might of the Spirit that makes the body life-giving. The words then that I have spoken with you are spirit, that, is both spiritual and of the Spirit, and they are life."

Even the body of Christ itself was sanctified by the power of the Word made one with it, and it is thus endowed with living force in the blessed Eucharist so that is it able to implant in us its sanctifying grace.… For here too he says that the flesh can profit nothing, that is, to sanctify and quicken those who receive it, insofar as it is mere human flesh. But when flesh is understood and believed to be the temple of the Word, then surely it will be a channel of sanctification and life, not altogether of itself but through God who has been made one with it, who is holy and life.

It is the Spirit That quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing.

It is not unreasonably (He says) that ye have clothed the flesh in no power of giving life. For when the nature of the flesh is considered alone and by itself, plainly it is not life-giving. For never will ought of things that are, give life, but rather it hath itself need of Him who is mighty to quicken. But when the Mystery of the Incarnation is carefully considered, and ye then learn who it is who dwelleth in this Flesh, ye will then surely feel (He says) unless you would accuse the Divine Spirit Itself also, that It can impart life, although of itself the flesh profiteth not a whit. For since it was united to the Life-giving Word, it hath become wholly Life-giving, hastening up to the power of the higher Nature, not itself forcing unto its own nature Him who cannot in any wise be subjected. Although then the nature of the flesh be in itself powerless to give life, yet will it inwork this, when it has the Life-working Word, and is replete with His whole operation. For it is the Body of that which is by Nature Life, not of any earthly being, as to whom that might rightly hold, The flesh profiteth nothing. For not the flesh of Paul (for instance) nor yet of Peter, or any other, would work this in us; but only and specially that of our Saviour Christ in whom dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. For verily it would be a thing most absurd that honey should infuse its own quality into things which naturally have no sweetness, and should have power to transfer into itself that wherewith it is mingled, and that the Life-giving Nature of God the Word should not be able to elevate to Its own good that Body which It indwelt. Wherefore as to all other things the saying will be true, that the flesh profiteth nothing; but as to Christ alone it holdeth not, by reason that Life, that is the Only-Begotten, dwelt therein. And He calls Himself Spirit, for God is a Spirit and as the blessed Paul saith, For the Lord is the Spirit. And we do not say these things, as taking away from the Holy Ghost His Proper Existence; but as He calls Himself Son of man, since He was made Man, so again He calls Himself Spirit from His Own Spirit. For not Other than He is His Spirit.

His meaning is, "Ye must hear spiritually what relateth to Me, for he who heareth carnally is not profited, nor gathereth any advantage." It was carnal to question how He came down from heaven, to deem that He was the son of Joseph, to ask, "How can he give us His flesh to eat?" All this was carnal, when they ought to have understood the matter in a mystical and spiritual sense. "But," saith some one, "how could they understand what the 'eating flesh' might mean?" Then it was their duty to wait for the proper time and enquire, and not to abandon Him.

"The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life."

That is, they are divine and spiritual, have nothing carnal about them, are not subject to the laws of physical consequence, but are free from any such necessity, are even set above the laws appointed for this world, and have also another and a different meaning. Now as in this passage He said "spirit," instead of "spiritual," so when He speaketh of "flesh," He meant not "carnal things," but "carnally hearing," and alluding at the same time to them, because they ever desired carnal things when they ought to have desired spiritual. For if a man receives them carnally, he profits nothing. "What then, is not His flesh, flesh?" Most certainly. "How then saith He, that the flesh profiteth nothing?" He speaketh not of His own flesh, (God forbid!) but of those who received His words in a carnal manner. But what is "understanding carnally"? It is looking merely to what is before our eyes, without imagining anything beyond. This is understanding carnally. But we must not judge thus by sight, but must look into all mysteries with the eyes within. This is seeing spiritually. He that eateth not His flesh, and drinketh not His blood, hath no life in him. How then doth "the flesh profit nothing," if without it we cannot live? Seest thou that the words, "the flesh profiteth nothing," are spoken not of His own flesh, but of carnal hearing?

If he says that "the flesh profits nothing," then the meaning must take direction from the context of that remark. For seeing that they regarded his speech as hard and unbearable, as though he had really prescribed his flesh for them to eat, since his purpose was to assign the establishment of salvation to the Spirit, he first said, "It is the spirit that gives life," and only then added, "the flesh profits nothing"—toward the giving of life, of course. He also proceeds to state how he wishes "the Spirit" to be understood. "The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." … And so, when establishing his teaching as the Life-giver (because the Word is spirit and life), he also said that it is his flesh, because the Word also was made flesh. We ought therefore to desire him in order that we may have life. We ought to devour him with the ear, and to ruminate on him with the mind and to digest him by faith.

Well, I on my side will first explain the reason of his offence, that I may the more easily explode the scandal of our heretic. Now, that the very Lord Himself of all might, the Word and Spirit of the Father, was operating and preaching on earth, it was necessary that the portion of the Holy Spirit which, in the form of the prophetic gift, had been through John preparing the ways of the Lord, should now depart from John, and return back again of course to the Lord, as to its all-embracing original.

He says, it is true, that "the flesh profiteth nothing; " but then, as in the former case, the meaning must be regulated by the subject which is spoken of.

For it is "the Spirit that quickeneth" us for the kingdom of God; "the flesh profiteth nothing." There is, however, something else which can be profitable thereunto, that is, the Spirit; and through the Spirit, the works also of the Spirit.

They understood Christ's words in a carnal manner, as we have often said, and were scandalized. Therefore He says that only the spiritual understanding of My words is profitable, while the flesh, that is, the carnal understanding of them, is not at all profitable, but becomes an occasion for scandal. Thus they were scandalized, understanding Christ's words carnally. He adds that the words which I speak are "spirit," that is, spiritual, "and life," having nothing carnal in them, but bestowing eternal life.

Then he settles the offense they took at what he said, concerning the person speaking. The occasion for their scandal was when they heard our Lord say divine things about himself. And so, because they believed that he was the son of Joseph, they were upset at what he said about himself. God takes away this reason by showing them his divinity more openly, and says: You are upset over the things I have said about myself; What if you should see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? What would you say then? As if to say: You can never deny that I came down from heaven, or that I am the one who gives and teaches eternal life. He did the same thing before with Nathanael. When Nathanael said to him, "You are the King of Israel" our Lord, wanting to lead him to more perfect knowledge, answered him: "You will see greater things than this" (Jn 1:50). And here too, our Lord reveals to them something greater about himself which would happen in the future, saying, What if you should see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? Indeed, he did ascend into heaven in the sight of his disciples (Acts 1:9). If, therefore, he does ascend to where he was before, then he was in heaven before: "No one has gone up to heaven except the one who came down from heaven" (Jn 3:13).

Let us note that Christ is one person: the person of the Son of God and the person of the Son of Man being the same person. Still, because of his different natures, something belongs to Christ by reason of his human nature, that is, to ascend, which does not belong to him by reason of his divine nature, according to which he does not ascend, since he is eternally at the highest summit of things, that is, in the Father. It is according to his human nature that it belongs to him to ascend to where he was before, that is, to heaven, where he had not been in his human nature. Thus, Christ ascended in the sight of his apostles to where he was before according to his divinity; and he ascended, by his own power, according to his humanity: "I came forth from the Father, and I have come into the world. Now I am leaving the world and am going to the Father" (Jn 16:28).

Augustine understands this passage differently. He said that the disciples were scandalized when our Lord said that he would give them his flesh to eat because they understood this in a material minded way, as if they were literally to eat this flesh, just like the flesh of an animal. Our Lord rejected this interpretation and said, What if you should see the Son of Man ascending, with his entire body, to where he was before? Would you say that I intended to give you my flesh to eat like you do the flesh of an animal?

"But," saith He, "there are some among you that believe not." He said not There are some among you that understand not; but He told the cause why they understand not "There are some among you that believe not," and therefore they understand not, because they believe not. For the prophet has said, "If ye believe not, ye shall not understand." We are united by faith, quickened by understanding. Let us first adhere to Him through faith, that there may be that which may be quickened by understanding. For he who adheres not resists; he that resists believes not. And how can he that resists be quickened? He is an adversary to the ray of light by which he should be penetrated: he turns not away his eye, but shuts his mind. "There are," then, "some who believe not." Let them believe and open, let them open and be illumined. "For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed, and who should betray Him." For Judas also was there. Some indeed, were offended; but he remained to watch his opportunity, not to understand. And because he remained for that purpose, the Lord kept not silence concerning him. He described him not by name, but neither was He silent about him; that all might fear though only one should perish.

Here the reason for the murmuring is touched upon, that is, why the disciples were murmuring: because they did not have faith; but not all of them, only some, who were not chosen by God. Therefore he says: "But there are some of you": thus the words are to be understood spiritually, but some of you do not understand; whence "some do not believe." And he says this not from conjecture but from certain knowledge. Therefore the Evangelist says: "For Jesus knew from the beginning who were the believers"; above in chapter two: "For he himself knew what was in man"; Sirach chapter twenty-three: "The eyes of the Lord are far brighter than the sun, surveying all the ways of men and the depth of the abyss, and beholding the hearts of men in their hidden places." "And who would betray him": whence he was not betrayed as one ignorant, as other men are. Therefore the Evangelist says this, lest Christ appear to have been deceived in admitting unstable disciples and treacherous disciples, such as the traitor. The reason, moreover, why they did not believe was that, although they had been called outwardly and according to present justice, they had not been called according to eternal election; and this he said above and repeats.

Herein again one may clearly see fulfilled that which was fore-heralded by one of the holy Prophets, With your hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand, and looking shall look and shall not see. For the heart of this people is waxen fat, and they have weighed down their ears and closed their eyes, lest they should at all see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and should convert, and I should heal them. For they being themselves ear-witnesses of the doctrines of the Saviour, and from none other of the saints learning them, but rather instructed in the mysteries by the Voice of the Lord of all, yea even seeing Him with their bodily eyes, waxed gross in their folly, and having closed the eyes of their understanding, turned them away from the Sun of Righteousness, not admitting the illumination of the gospel instruction. For evil were they, and guilty of many past offences. Wherefore also the wise Paul testified to us that hardness in part is happened unto Israel. But since it was the work of no common wisdom to acknowledge that He Who was veiled in human form is God, He saith that he cannot come to Him who has not yet received, i. e., understanding from God the Father, and with reason. For if every good gift and every perfect gift is from above and cometh down from the Father of lights, how much more will not the acknowledgement of Christ, be a gift of the Father's Eight Hand, and the apprehension of the truth how will it not be conceived to be beyond all grace? For in proportion as it is shown to be the Giver of the highest goods, so much the more befits it that it depend upon the Divine Munificence. But not to the unclean does the Father grant the knowledge of Christ, nor to those accustomed to stray unto extravagant unbelief doth He infuse the most helpful grace of the Spirit: for not on mud is it right that the precious ointment be poured forth. And verily the blessed prophet Jeremiah commands that they be first purged by desire unto every good work, who desire to draw near unto Christ through faith, crying out, Seek ye God and when ye find Him call on Him; when He shall be nigh to you, let the ungodly man forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his counsel, and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him, for He will abundantly pardon your sins. Thou seest how he says that he must first depart from his old way, and remove from unlawful devices, that he may obtain remission of sins, i. e., through faith in Christ. For we are justified not by the works of the law, but by the grace that is from Him, and the forgiveness granted us from above.

But some one may say, Therefore what hindered Him from pardoning the Jews also, and from pouring out remission on Israel together with us? for this too would befit Him That was perfectly good. And how too (says he) will He speak truly when He saith to us, I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance?

What shall we say then to these things? For them of Israel alone at the first was the grace of the Saviour devised. For He was sent, as Himself affirmed, only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And in truth they who will believe may yet attain unto life everlasting. But some, living in a nobler course of life, and searchers of the truth, received the grace of God the Father co-working with them unto salvation through faith and were saved: but the haughty Pharisee, and the hard-hearted high-priests with them, and the elders of the people, would not believe, though fore-instructed by Moses and the Prophets. But since through their own ill-counsel, they at length showed themselves unworthy of everlasting life, they received not the illumination which is from God the Father. And you have the type of this too in the elder writings. For as to them who disbelieved God in the wilderness, entry into the land of promise was not given; so to these who by their unbelief dishonour Christ, entrance was not granted into the kingdom of heaven, whereof the land of promise was the type. And God is not unrighteous Who bringeth His wrath upon each. For He being Just by Nature, will discriminate altogether rightly, and will direct His Own Judgment agreeably to His Own Nature, even though we understand not the mode of the economy which is above us.

Profitably does the blessed Evangelist tell us that Jesus knew all things, and was not ignorant who should disbelieve, and who was the minister of impiety against Him, that He might again be conceived of as God, as knowing all things before they are.

Jesus Christ knows the thoughts of the mind, as it is now, stirred by present motives, and as it will be tomorrow, aroused by the impulse of future desires.… By its virtue his nature could perceive the unborn future and foresee the awakening of passions yet dormant in the mind. Do you believe that it did not know what is through itself and within itself? He is Lord of all that belongs to others; is he not Lord of his own?

"But there are some of you that believe not."

Again, according to His custom, He addeth weight to His words, by foretelling what would come to pass, and by showing that He spake thus not from desire of honor from them, but because He cared for them. And when He said "some," He excepted the disciples. For at first He said, "Ye have both seen Me, and believe not"; but here, "There are some of you that believe not."

For He "knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray Him."

Here the Evangelist intimates to us the voluntary character of the Dispensation, and His endurance of evil. Nor is the, "from the beginning," put here without a cause, but that thou mayest be aware of His foreknowledge from the first, and that before the words were uttered, and not after the men had murmured nor after they had been offended, He knew the traitor, but before, which was an attribute of Godhead.

For He "knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray Him."

"And He said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto Me except it were given unto Him from above from My Father."

Here the Evangelist intimates to us the voluntary character of the Dispensation, and His endurance of evil. Nor is the, "from the beginning," put here without a cause, but that thou mayest be aware of His foreknowledge from the first, and that before the words were uttered, and not after the men had murmured nor after they had been offended, He knew the traitor, but before, which was an attribute of Godhead. Then He added, "Except it be given him from above from My Father"; thus persuading them to deem God His Father, not Joseph, and showing them that it is no common thing to believe in Him. As though He had said, "Unbelievers disturb Me not; trouble Me not, astonish Me not. I know of old before they were created, I know to whom the Father hath given to believe"; and do thou, when thou hearest that "He hath given," imagine not merely an arbitrary distribution, but that if any hath rendered himself worthy to receive the gift, he hath received it.

Manifesting a property of divinity, namely revealing what is hidden, He tells them that some of you do not believe; by saying "some," He excluded the disciples. And the evangelist, wishing to show us that He knew all things before the foundation of the world, says that Jesus knew from the beginning who the unbelievers were, and knew also the malice of the betrayer. And this was proof of true Divinity. For the prophet says of God: "who knows all things before their coming to be" (Dan. 13:42).

Then he settles the offense they took at what he said. And, as Chrysostom says, he distinguished two ways in which his words could be understood.

With respect to the first, we should note that Christ's words can be understood in two senses: in a spiritual way, and in a material way. Thus he says, It is the spirit that gives life, that is, if you understand these words according to the spirit, i.e., according to their spiritual meaning, they will give life. Flesh profits nothing, that is, if you understand them in a material way, they will be of no benefit to you, they will, rather, be harmful, for "If you live according to the flesh you will die" (Rom 8:13).

What our Lord said about eating his flesh is interpreted in a material way when it is understood in its superficial meaning, and as pertaining to the nature of flesh. And it was in this way that the Jews understood them. But our Lord said that he would give himself to them as spiritual food, not as though the true flesh of Christ is not present in this sacrament of the altar, but because it is eaten in a certain spiritual and divine way. Thus, the correct meaning of these words is spiritual, not material. So he says, The words that I have spoken to you, about eating my flesh, are spirit and life, that is, they have a spiritual meaning, and understood in this way they give life. And it is not surprising that they have a spiritual meaning, because they are from the Holy Spirit: "It is the Spirit who tells mysteries" (1 Cor 14:2). And therefore, the mysteries of Christ give life: "I will never forget your justifications, because through them you have brought me to life" (Ps 118:93).

Augustine explains this passage in a different way, for he understands the statement, flesh profits nothing, as referring to the flesh of Christ. It is obvious that the flesh of Christ, as united to the Word and to the Spirit, does profit very much and in every way; otherwise, the Word would have been made flesh in vain, and the Father would have made him known in the flesh in vain, as we see from 1 Timothy (c 4). And so we should say that it is the flesh of Christ, considered in itself, that profits nothing and does not have any more beneficial effect than other flesh. For if his flesh is considered as separated from the divinity and the Holy Spirit, it does not have different power than other flesh. But if it is united to the Spirit and the divinity, it profits many, because it makes those who receive it abide in Christ, for man abides in God through the Spirit of love: "We know that we abide in God and God in us, because he has given us his Spirit" (1 Jn 4:13). And this is what our Lord says: the effect I promise you, that is, eternal life, should not be attributed to my flesh as such, because understood in this way, flesh profits nothing. But my flesh does offer eternal life as united to the Spirit and to the divinity. "If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit" (Gal 5:25). And so he adds, The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life, i.e., they must be understood of the Spirit united to my flesh; and so understood they are life, that is, the life of the soul. For as the body lives its bodily life through a bodily spirit, so the soul lives a spiritual life through the Holy Spirit: "Send forth your Spirit, and they will be created" (Ps 103:30).

But in order to teach us that even believing itself is a gift, not a merit: "As I said to you, no one comes to me unless it has been given to him by my Father." But where the Lord said this, if we recall the earlier words of the Gospel, we find him saying: "No one comes to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." He did not say "leads," but "draws." This drawing is a force exerted on the heart, not on the flesh. Why then do you marvel? Believe, and you come; love, and you are drawn. Do not think of this as a harsh and troublesome force: it is sweet, it is gentle; it is sweetness itself that draws you. Is not the sheep drawn when the hungry one is shown the grass? And I believe it is not pushed bodily but bound by desire. Thus also come to Christ: do not contemplate long journeys; where you believe, there you come. For to him who is everywhere, one comes by loving, not by sailing. But since even on such a journey the waves and storms of various temptations abound; believe in the crucified, so that your faith may climb the wood. You will not sink, but you will be carried by the wood. Thus, thus in the waves of this world did he navigate who said: "But far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ."

But after He spoke, and distinguished those that believe from those that believe not, He clearly showed the cause why they believed not. "Therefore I said unto you," saith He, "that no man can come unto me except it were given to him of my Father." Hence to believe is also given to us; for certainly to believe is something. And if it is something great, rejoice that thou hast believed, yet be not lifted up; for "What hast thou that thou didst not receive?"

(Tr. xxvii. 7) And after distinguishing those who believed from those who did not believe, our Lord gives the reason of the unbelief of the latter, And He said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto Me, except it were given him of My Father.

(Tr. xxvii. 7) So then (our) faith is given to us: and no small gift it is. Wherefore rejoice if thou believest; but be not lifted up, for what hast thou which thou didst not receive? (1 Cor. 4:7.) And that this grace is given to some, and not to others, no one can doubt, without going against the plainest declarations of Scripture. As for the question, why it is not given to all, this cannot disquiet the believer, who knows that in consequence of the sin of one man, all are justly liable to condemnation; and that no blame could attach to God, even if none were pardoned; it being of His great mercy only that so many are. And why He pardons one rather than another, rests with Him, whose judgments are unsearchable, and His ways past finding out.

"And he said: Therefore I said to you: No one can come to me unless it has been given to him by my Father": above in the same chapter: "No one comes to me unless the Father draws him." For to "come" to the Son "is the best gift and the perfect gift," therefore "from above," James chapter one.

Finally, when, after the resurrection, the apostles are sent by the Lord to the heathens, they are bidden to baptize the Gentiles "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." How, then, do some say, that a Gentile baptized without, outside the Church, yea, and in opposition to the Church, so that it be only in the name of Jesus Christ, everywhere, and in whatever manner, can obtain remission of sin, when Christ Himself commands the heathen to be baptized in the full and united Trinity? Unless while one who denies Christ is denied by Christ, he who denies His Father whom Christ Himself confessed is not denied; and he who blasphemes against Him whom Christ called His Lord and His God, is rewarded by Christ, and obtains remission of sins, and the sanctification of baptism! But by what power can he who denies God the Creator, the Father of Christ, obtain, in baptism, the remission of sins, since Christ received that very power by which we are baptized and sanctified, from the same Father, whom He called "greater" than Himself, by whom He desired to be glorified, whose will He fulfilled even unto the obedience of drinking the cup, and of undergoing death? What else is it then, than to become a partaker with blaspheming heretics, to wish to maintain and assert, that one who blasphemes and gravely sins against the Father and the Lord and God of Christ, can receive remission of sins in the name of Christ? What, moreover, is that, and of what kind is it, that he who denies the Son of God has not the Father, and he who denies the Father should be thought to have the Son, although the Son Himself testifies, and says, "No man can come unto me except it were given unto him of my Father? " So that it is evident, that no remission of sins can be received in baptism from the Son, which it is not plain that the Father has granted. Especially, since He further repeats, and says, "Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up."

(Hom. xlvi. 2) As if He said, Men's unbelief does not disturb or astonish Me: I know to whom the Father hath given to come to Me. He mentions the Father, to show first that He had no eye to His own glory; secondly, that God was His Father, and not Joseph.

We have often said that when you hear that the Father gives faith in the Son, do not think that the Father bestows grace on some and not on others, as if by lot, for this would be characteristic of one who is unjust. Rather, understand it this way: the Father bestows grace and gives the gift of faith to those who have the will for it. For he who has no will shall not benefit even from the help of God. Let me explain. God gives His gifts to all. Some receive them and make good use of what is given, and by preserving it, they display the gift of God. But others receive yet lose what was given, and turn out to have received nothing. So when the Evangelist says that he to whom it has not been given by the Father cannot come to the Son, his words mean that he comes to the Son to whom the Father gives and who preserves the gift bestowed on him by God.

Then he indicates the reason why they were upset, that is, their unbelief. As if to say: the cause of your difficulty is not the hardness of what I have just said, but your own unbelief. And so first, he mentions their unbelief; secondly, he excludes an incorrect interpretation; and thirdly, he gives the reason for their unbelief.

Our Lord indicated their unbelief when he said, But there are some of you who do not believe. He did not say, "who do not understand." He did more than this, for he gave the reason why they did not understand: they did not understand because they did not believe. "If you do not believe, you will not understand," as we read in another version of Isaiah (7:9). He said, some, in order to exclude his disciples: "All do not have faith" (2 Thes 3:2); "All do not obey the Gospel" (Rom 10:16); "They did not believe what he said" (Ps 105:24).

The Evangelist then rejects an incorrect interpretation when he adds, For Jesus knew. As if to say: Jesus did not say, there are some of you who do not believe, because he just recently learned it, but because Jesus knew from the beginning, i.e., of the world, those who would believe in him, and who it was that would betray him. "All things are naked and open to his eyes" (Heb 4:13); "All things were known to the Lord God before they were created," as we read in Sirach (23:29).

Christ, the Son of God, by His coming has confirmed and completed the law, but has taken away the additional precepts, although not all of them, yet at least the more grievous ones; having confirmed the former, and abolished the latter, and has again set the free-will of man at liberty, not subjecting him to the penalty of a temporal death, but giving laws to him according to another constitution. Wherefore He says: "If any man will come after me, let him come." And again: "Will ye also go away?"

For it is the part of true godliness not to compel but to persuade. Our Lord himself does not employ force but offers the choice, saying to everyone, "If anyone will follow after me," and to his disciples in particular, "Will you also go away?"

Our Lord knew well the intentions of the other disciples which stayed, as to staying or going; but yet He put the question to them, in order to prove their faith, and hold it up to imitation: Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

Here the confirmation of the believers and the elect is touched upon: and this indeed was accomplished in the faithful confession of Peter; therefore the inquiry of the Lord and the response of Peter are set forth. The Lord inquires of the twelve, whom he had specially chosen: "Do you also wish to go away?" — abandoning me, just as the preceding ones do: Jeremiah chapter two: "They have forsaken me, the fountain of living water." But he asks, not because he is in doubt, but so that he might bring forth the faith of Peter as an example of firmness.

Nor ought it, my dearest brother, to disturb any one who is faithful and mindful of the Gospel, and retains the commands of the apostle who forewarns us; if in the last days certain persons, proud, contumacious, and enemies of God's priests, either depart from the Church or act against the Church, since both the Lord and His apostles have previously foretold that there should be such. Nor let any one wonder that the servant placed over them should be forsaken by some, when His own disciples forsook the Lord Himself, who performed such great and wonderful works, and illustrated the attributes of God the Father by the testimony of His doings. And yet He did not rebuke them when they went away, nor even severely threaten them; but rather, turning to His apostles, He said, "Will ye also go away? " manifestly observing the law whereby a man left to his own liberty, and established in his own choice, himself desires for himself either death or salvation. Nevertheless, Peter, upon whom by the same Lord the Church had been built, speaking one for all, and answering with the voice of the Church, says, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure that Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God: " signifying, doubtless, and showing that those who departed from Christ perished by their own fault, yet that the Church which believes on Christ, and holds that which it has once learned, never departs from Him at all, and that those are the Church who remain in the house of God; but that, on the other hand, they are not the plantation planted by God the Father, whom we see not to be established with the stability of wheat, but blown about like chaff by the breath of the enemy scattering them, of whom John also in his epistle says, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us." Paul also warns us, when evil men perish out of the Church, not to be disturbed, nor to let our faith be lessened by the departure of the faithless. "For what," he says, "if some of them have departed from the faith? Hath their unbelief made the faith of God of none effect? God forbid! For God is true, but every man a liar."

You have written also, that on my account the Church has now a portion of herself in a state of dispersion, although the whole people of the Church are collected, and united, and joined to itself in an undivided concord: they alone have remained without, who even, if they had been within, would have had to be cast out. Nor does the Lord, the protector of His people, and their guardian, suffer the wheat to be snatched from His floor; but the chaff alone can be separated from the Church, since also the apostle says, "For what if some of them have departed from the faith? shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? God forbid; for God is true, but every man a liar." And the Lord also in the Gospel, when disciples forsook Him as He spoke, turning to the twelve, said, "Will ye also go away? "then Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the word of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure, that Thou art the Son of the living God." Peter speaks there, on whom the Church was to be built, teaching and showing in the name of the Church, that although a rebellious and arrogant multitude of those who will not hear and obey may depart, yet the Church does not depart from Christ; and they are the Church who are a people united to the priest, and the flock which adheres to its pastor. Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, that he is not in the Church, and that those flatter themselves in vain who creep in, not having peace with God's priests, and think that they communicate secretly with some; while the Church, which is Catholic and one, is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound together by the cement of priests who cohere with one another.

Our Lord Jesus Christ doth not exhort the holy Apostles to leave Him, nor doth He offer them free and unfettered liberty of doing so, nor yet doth He permit them readily to turn aside as though they would get no harm from doing so: yea, rather He threatens them well, that if they be not found superior to the undisciplined conduct of the Jews, they too shall be sent away, and go no more with Him, but depart unto perdition. For it is not at all the number of worshippers that is precious in the sight of God, but the excellent in the right faith, though they be few. Therefore the Divine Scripture says that many are they that have been called, but that only the chosen will be received, and those that are approved, being very few. And this the Divine Word Himself testified to us. It is therefore as though the Saviour said to His disciples, If ye unhesitatingly believe My words, if letting go wavering in ought, ye with simple faith receive the Mystery, if it seem bitter to you and fall of intolerable infamy that My Words are accused of being hard, if ye refuse to say in Jewish fashion, How can This Man give us His Flesh to eat, I will gladly see you with Me, and will rejoice in living with you, and will love you as Mine Own, but if ye choose to think with them who have fallen back, I both enjoin you to run away with them, and do justly drive you away. For worshippers will not fail Me, seeing the Gospel message shall be spoken not in Judaea alone, but now goeth about into the whole world, and calleth men together from all parts as it were into one company, and gathereth them together with ease unto the acknowledgment of the truth. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God, as Paul saith; severity towards the unbelievers, goodness again towards them who shall acknowledge Him, if they continue in His goodness, as Paul again affirmeth, else they too shall be cut off. For He That spared not the natural branches, neither shall He spare them that were graffed in. Let him then that of folly halteth concerning the faith know and be taught by these things, that if he will not cease from such a disease, he will go back, and having no longer any Guide unto eternal life, will go down wretched into hell, and there bewail his own miscounsel. For there (He saith) shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

It is probable however that some other profitable lesson is conveyed to us, by Jesus saying to His disciples, Would YE also go away? for lest they too should be thought to have been carried off by Jewish folly, and to have stumbled together with the unbelievers, or in any other way to cry out against Him with them, as though He taught hard things and tried to instruct His hearers in the knowledge of impossibilities, profitably did He enquire of them if they desired to depart with them, that hereby He might invite them to confession of the right and untaint faith, which indeed also came to pass.

For it is not the number of worshipers but rather those who excel in the right faith, though they are few, that are precious in the sight of God.

Again showing that He needeth not their ministry and service, and proving to them that it was not for this that He led them about with Him. For how could He when He used such expressions even to them? But why did He not praise them? why did He not approve them? Both because He preserved the dignity befitting a teacher, and also to show them that they ought rather to be attracted by this mode of dealing. For had He praised them, they might, supposing that they were doing Him a favor, have had some human feeling; but by showing them that He needed not their attendance, He kept them to Him the more. And observe with what prudence He spake. He said not, "Depart ye," (this would have been to thrust them from Him,) but asked them a question, "Will ye also go away?" the expression of one who would remove all force or compulsion, and who wished not that they should be attached to Him through any sense of shame, but with a sense of favor. By not openly accusing, but gently glancing at them, He showeth what is the truly wise course under such circumstances. But we feel differently; with good reason, since we do everything holding fast our own honor, and therefore think that our estate is lowered by the departure of those who attend on us. But He neither flattered nor repulsed them, but asked them a question. Now this was not the act of one despising them, but of one wishing them not to be restrained by force and compulsion: for to remain on such terms is the same as to depart. What then saith Peter?

And observe also the love of the Apostles, which was a wonderful thing, for while as yet the Holy Spirit was not mingled in their nature, they accompanied Jesus in all fervour, and without His stimulating or flattering them, as He to-day flattereth thee with all manner of entreaties, but He spake unto them haughtily, and from outward signs it might be thought that He was driving them away from Him. "If ye wish to go away, depart," He once said unto them, and by reason of the hardness of His word many left him and departed. Simon saith unto Him, "Unto whom shall we go?" We have once and for all gone forth after Thee, and we have no place to go away from following Thee. "For Thou hast the words of eternal life," that is to say, "Thy words are life, and how shall we forsake life and go after death? For we have forsaken everything and come after Thee, because we believe and know that Thou art the Son of the Living God."

Did not certain of the disciples turn back from the Lord Himself, When they were offended? Yet the rest did not therefore think that they must turn away from following Him, but because they knew that He was the Word of Life, and was come from God, they continued in His company to the very last, after He had gently inquired of them whether they also would go away. It is a comparatively small thing, that certain men, like Phygellus, and Hermogenes, and Philetus, and Hymenµus, deserted His apostle: the betrayer of Christ was himself one of the apostles.

But He, showing that He has no need of anyone nor of any service or care from them, says to them: "Do you also want to go away?" Why, on the contrary, did He not praise the twelve disciples for not having departed along with the rest? On the one hand, to preserve the dignity of the Teacher, and on the other, to show us as well that in this way one can attract even more. For if He had praised them, they might perhaps have experienced something human and become proud, thinking that by following Him they were doing Him a favor. But by showing that He had no need of their following Him, He was better able to retain them as those who were more benefited than benefiting, and receiving grace rather than giving it. Note how wisely He expressed Himself. He did not say "go away," for that would mean pushing them away, but He asks "do you not wish to go away?" In this way He grants complete freedom to follow or not, showing that He wants them to follow Him not out of shame before Him, but from the awareness that they will receive grace for following.

Then we see the stubbornness of the disciples: for although our Lord had rebuked them and had taken away the cause of their difficulty so far as it concerned himself, they still would not believe. Thus he says, From this time on, many of his disciples turned back. He did not say, "they left," but that they turned back, i.e., from the faith, which they had in a virtuous way; and cut off from the body of Christ, they lost life, because perhaps they were not in the body, as Augustine says. There are some who turn back in an absolute way, that is, those who follow the devil, to whom our Lord said, "Go back, Satan" (Mt 4:10). We also read of certain women that "Some turned back after Satan" (1 Tim 5:15). But Peter did not turn back in this way; he rather turned after Christ: "Follow after me, Satan" (Mt 16:23). But the others followed after Satan.

Then follows: they no longer walked with him, that is, even though we are required to walk with Jesus: "I will show you man what is good," and then it continues on, "to walk attentively with your God" (Mi 6:8).

"And these things," he says, "the soldiers did. Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary [the wife] of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple standing by whom He loved, He saith unto His mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith He to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour the disciple took her unto his own home." This, without a doubt, was the hour whereof Jesus, when about to turn the water into wine, had said to His mother, "Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come." This hour, therefore, He had foretold, which at that time had not yet arrived, when it should be His to acknowledge her at the point of death, and with reference to which He had been born as a mortal man. At that time, therefore, when about to engage in divine acts, He repelled, as one unknown, her who was the mother, not of His divinity, but of His [human] infirmity; but now, when in the midst of human sufferings, He commended with human affection [the mother] by whom He had become man. For then, He who had created Mary became known in His power; but now, that which Mary had brought forth was hanging on the cross.

A passage, therefore, of a moral character is here inserted. The good Teacher does what He thereby reminds us ought to be done, and by His own example instructed His disciples that care for their parents ought to be a matter of concern to pious children: as if that tree to which the members of the dying One were affixed were the very chair of office from which the Master was imparting instruction. From this wholesome doctrine it was that the Apostle Paul had learned what he taught in turn, when he said, "But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." And what are so much home concerns to any one, as parents to children, or children to parents? Of this most wholesome precept, therefore, the very Master of the saints set the example from Himself, when, not as God for the hand-maid whom He had created and governed, but as a man for the mother, of whom He had been created, and whom He was now leaving behind, He provided in some measure another son in place of Himself. And why He did so, He indicates in the words that follow: for the evangelist says, "And from that hour the disciple took her unto his own," speaking of himself. In this way, indeed, he usually refers to himself as the disciple whom Jesus loved: who certainly loved them all, but him beyond the others, and with a closer familiarity, so that He even made him lean upon His bosom at supper; in order, I believe, in this way to commend the more highly the divine excellence of this very gospel, which He was thereafter to preach through his instrumentality.

(Tr. cxix. 1) This truly is that hour of the which Jesus, when about to change the water into wine, said, Mother, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come. Then, about to act divinely, He repelled the mother of His humanity, of His infirmity, as if He knew her not: now, suffering humanly, He commends with human affection her of whom He was made man. Here is a moral lesson. The good Teacher shows us by His example how that pious sons should take care of their parents. The cross of the sufferer, is the chair of the Master.

Beyond the others, Jesus loved the one who, being a virgin when chosen by him, remained forever a virgin. Now stories handed down say the [Christ] called [John] from his marriage ceremony when he wished to marry, and on that account he granted the more desirable sweetness of his own love to one whom he had withdrawn from fleshly pleasures. Accordingly, when [Christ] was about to die on the cross, he commended his mother to [John], so that virgin might watch over virgin, and when he himself ascended to heaven after his death and resurrection, a son would not be lacking to his mother, whose chaste life would be protected by his chaste services.

By the disciple whom Jesus loved, the Evangelist means himself; not that the others were not loved, but he was loved more intimately on account of his estate of chastity; for a Virgin our Lord called him, and a Virgin he ever remained.

Another reading is, Accepit eam discipulus in suam, his own mother some understand, but to his own care seems better.

When Christ suffered on the cross, then the blessed Virgin was present, accepting and consenting to the divine will. And it pleased her that the price of her womb should be offered on the cross for us. "When Jesus therefore saw his mother and the disciple standing, whom he loved, he said to his mother: Woman, behold your son," namely, who will be handed over as the price of redemption of the human race: as if he were saying: it is necessary for you to be without me, and for me to be without you; and you yourself, as a holy woman, conceived him, and as a devout woman, you offer him; may it please you, O Virgin, that I redeem the human race and appease God.

When Jesus therefore had seen. Here the second point is noted, namely the Lord's solicitude toward his Mother, in this, that he looked upon her and considered to whom he might commend her: whence he says: When Jesus therefore had seen his Mother: when he had seen, as one who was solicitous: First Timothy chapter five: "If anyone does not have care of his own and especially of those of his household," etc. And Chrysostom says: "Here the Lord shows great love toward his Mother and commends her to the disciple, teaching us to exercise all diligence toward those who begot us, even unto our last breath." Exodus chapter twenty: "Honor your father and your mother," etc. What he commanded, he fulfilled. And the disciple standing there, whom he loved: and therefore he was able to commend her to him intimately. John was standing there, he had not withdrawn: whence he was one of those to whom it is said in Luke chapter twenty-two: "You are they who have continued with me in my trials."

He says to his Mother. Here the third point is noted, namely the loving commendation; whence he says: Woman, behold, your son: as if to say: trust in him as in a son.

He took thought for His mother, paying no heed to His own bitter agony, for His sufferings affected Him not. He gave her into the charge of the beloved disciple (this was John, the writer of this book), and bade him take her home, and regard her as a mother; and enjoined His own mother to regard him as none other than her true son----by his tenderness, that is, and affection, fulfilling and stepping into the place of Him, Who was her Son by nature.

But as some misguided men have thought that Christ, when He thus spake, gave way to mere fleshly affection ----away with such folly! to fall into so stupid an error is only worthy of a madman----what good purpose, then, did Christ hereby fulfil? First, we reply, that He wished to confirm the command on which the Law lays so much stress. For what saith the Mosaic ordinance? Honour thy father and thy mother, that it may be well with thee. His commandment unto us did not cease with exhorting us to perform this duty, but threatened us with the extreme penalty of the Law, if we chose to disregard it, and has put sin against our parents after the flesh on a par with sin against God. For the Law which ordered that the blasphemer should undergo the sentence of death, saying: Let him that blasphemeth the Name of the Lord be put to death, also subjected to the same penalty the man who employs his licentious and unruly tongue against his parents: He that curseth father or mother shall surely be put to death. As, then, the Lawgiver hath ordained that we should pay such honour to our parents, surely it was right that the commandment thus proclaimed should be confirmed by the approval of the Saviour; and as the perfect form of every excellence and virtue through Him first came into the world, why should not this virtue be put on the same footing as the rest? For, surely, honour to parents is a very precious kind of virtue. And how could we learn that we ought not to lightly regard love toward them, even when we are overwhelmed by a flood of intolerable calamities, save by the example of Christ first of all, and through Him? For best of all, surely, is he who is mindful of the holy commandments, and is not diverted from the pursuit of duty in stormy and troublous times, and not in peace and quietness alone.

Besides, also, was not the Lord, I say, right to take thought for His mother, when she had fallen on a rock of offence, and when her mind was in a turmoil of perplexity? For, as He was truly God, and looked into the motions of the heart, and knew its secrets, how could He fail to know the thoughts about His crucifixion, which were then throwing her into sore distress? Knowing, then, what was passing in her heart, He commended her to the disciple, the best of guides, who was able to explain fully and adequately the profound mystery. For wise and learned in the things of God was he who received and took her away gladly, to fulfil all the Saviour's Will concerning her.

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.

"These things the soldiers did." But He on the Cross, committeth His mother to the disciple, teaching us even to our last breath to show every care for our parents. When indeed she unseasonably troubled Him, He said, "Woman, what have I to do with thee?" (c. ii. 4.) And, "Who is My mother?" (Matt. xii. 48.) But here He showeth much loving affection, and committeth her to the disciple whom He loved. Again John conceals himself, in modesty; for had he desired to boast, he would have also put in the cause for which he was loved, since probably it was some great and wonderful one. But wherefore doth He converse on nothing else with John, nor comfort him when desponding? Because it was no time for comforting by words; besides, it was no little thing for him to be honored with such honor, and to receive the reward of steadfastness. But do thou consider, I pray, how even on the cross He did everything without being troubled, speaking with the disciple concerning His mother, fulfilling prophecies, holding forth good hopes to the thief. Yet before He was crucified He appeareth sweating, agonized, fearing. What then can this mean? Nothing difficult, nothing doubtful. There indeed the weakness of nature had been shown, here was being shown the excess of Power. Besides, by these two things He teacheth us, even if before things terrible we be troubled, not on that account to shrink from things terrible, but when we have embarked in the contest to deem all things possible and easy. Let us then not tremble at death. Our soul hath by nature the love of life, but it lies with us either to loose the bands of nature, and make this desire weak; or else to tighten them, and make the desire more tyrannous.

And He, having committed His mother to John, said, "Behold thy Son." O the honor! with what honor did He honor the disciple! when He Himself was now departing, He committed her to the disciple to take care of. For since it was likely that, being His mother, she would grieve, and require protection, He with reason entrusted her to the beloved. To him He saith, "Behold thy mother." This He said, knitting them together in charity; which the disciple understanding, took her to his own home. "But why made He no mention of any other woman, although another stood there?" To teach us to pay more than ordinary respect to our mothers. For as when parents oppose us on spiritual matters, we must not even own them, so when they do not hinder us, we ought to pay them all becoming respect, and to prefer them before others, because they begat us, because they bred us up, because they bare for us ten thousand terrible things. And by these words He silenceth the shamelessness of Marcion; for if He were not born according to the flesh, nor had a mother, wherefore taketh He such forethought for her alone?

The Gospels are the firstfruits of all the Scriptures. But the firstfruits of the Gospels is the Gospel according to John whose meaning no one can understand who has not leaned on Jesus' breast or received Mary from Jesus to be his mother also. But whoever wants to become another "John" must also become such as John was. In other words, he must be shown to be Jesus, so to speak. For Mary had no son except Jesus (in accordance with those who hold a sound opinion of her). But Jesus says to his mother, "Behold your son," and not, "Behold, this man also is your son." If this is so, then Jesus has in effect said, "Behold, this is Jesus whom you bore" [when he presents John to her]. For indeed, everyone who has been perfected "no longer lives, but Christ lives in him." And, since "Christ lives" in him [i.e., John], it is said of him to Mary, "Behold your son," the Christ.

Now this speech is like unto the words, "Who is My mother?" and unto that which He said to John, "Behold thy mother!" and again He said to Mary, "Behold thy son!" And it is moreover like unto another speech which Jesus spake unto them when they sought to take Him with them to the feast as they were going up to Jerusalem, when He separated Himself from them, saying, "Go ye up to the feast, but I will not go up to the feast." For He said, "I will not go up as one who is subject unto the law." And in that He said, "I will not go up," He shewed two things; that He was subject neither unto parents, nor unto the law.

What man, then, of sound mind can possibly suppose that they were ignorant of anything, whom the Lord ordained to be masters (or teachers), keeping them, as He did, inseparable (from Himself) in their attendance, in their discipleship, in their society, to whom, "when they were alone, He used to expound" all things which were obscure, telling them that "to them it was given to know those mysteries," which it was not permitted the people to understand? Was anything withheld from the knowledge of Peter, who is called "the rock on which the church should be built," who also obtained "the keys of the kingdom of heaven," with the power of "loosing and binding in heaven and on earth? " Was anything, again, concealed from John, the Lord's most beloved disciple, who used to lean on His breast to whom alone the Lord pointed Judas out as the traitor, whom He commended to Mary as a son in His own stead? Of what could He have meant those to be ignorant, to whom He even exhibited His own glory with Moses and Elias, and the Father's voice moreover, from heaven? Not as if He thus disapproved of all the rest, but because "by three witnesses must every word be established.

He cares for His Mother, teaching us to show every care for our parents until our last breath. And notice, while other women are present here, He is concerned for His Mother alone. For parents who hinder the work of worshipping God should not be heeded, but those who do not hinder must be cared for in every way. And so He, since He Himself was departing from life, and it was natural for His Mother to grieve and seek protection, entrusts the care of Her to the disciple. The Evangelist conceals his name out of modesty. For if he had wished to boast, he would have presented the reason for which he was loved, and it was probably something great and wonderful. Ah! How He honored the disciple, making him His brother. So good is it to remain with Christ in His suffering, for it leads to brotherhood with Him. Behold how on the Cross He does everything without disturbance: He cares for His Mother, fulfills the prophecies, opens paradise to the thief, whereas before the crucifixion He experiences anguish of soul and exudes sweat. It is clear that the latter belongs to human nature, while the former belongs to the power of the Godhead. Let Marcion and all the rest be put to shame, who babbled that the Lord appeared to the world as a phantom. For if He was not born and did not have a Mother, then why does He show such great care for Her?

2439 The Evangelist now mentions Christ's concern for his mother (v 26). But first we see his solicitude for the welfare of his disciple, whom he entrusted to his mother; then we see his concern for his mother, whom he gave into the keeping of his disciple.

2440 As to the first he says, When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, Woman, behold, your son! He is saying: Up to now I have taken care for you and watched over you. Now, you take care for my disciple. This shows the eminence of John.

Before, when the Mother of Jesus said, "They have no wine," (2:3), he replied, "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come," that is, the hour of my passion, when I will suffer by means of what I have received from you. But when that hour comes I will acknowledge you. And now that the hour has come, he does acknowledge his mother. Yet I do not have the power to work miracles through what I have received from you, but rather through what I have from the generation of the Father, that is, insofar as I am God.

2441 As Augustine says, Christ hanging on the cross is like a teacher in his teaching chair. He is teaching us to help our parents in their needs, and to take care of them: "Honor your father and your mother" (Ex 20:12); "If any one does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his own family, he has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever" (1 Tim 5:8).

Why is the contrary found in Luke? "If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple" (Lk 14:26). I answer that when our Lord commands us to hate our parents and ourselves, he is commanding us to love them, their own individual nature and our own individual nature, and to hate moral evil and what turns our natures away from God. This means that we must aid our parents, love and reverence them as these human beings, but hate their moral vices and what in them turns us away from God.

But what was this "his own," unto which John took the mother of the Lord? For he was not outside the circle of those who said unto Him, "Lo, we have left all, and followed Thee." No, but on that same occasion he had also heard the words, Every one that hath forsaken these things for my sake, shall receive an hundred times as much in this world. That disciple, therefore, had an hundredfold more than he had cast away, whereunto to receive the mother of Him who had graciously bestowed it all. But it was in that society that the blessed John had received an hundredfold, where no one called anything his own, but they had all things in common; even as it is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. For the apostles were as if having nothing, and yet possessing all things. How was it, then, that the disciple and servant received unto his own the mother of his Lord and Master, where no one called anything his own? Or, seeing we read a little further on in the same book, "For as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of them, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need," are we not to understand that such distribution was made to this disciple of what was needful, that there was also added to it the portion of the blessed Mary, as if she were his mother; and ought we not the rather so to take the words, "From that hour the disciple took her unto his own," that everything necessary for her was entrusted to his care? He received her, therefore, not unto his own lands, for he had none of his own; but to his own dutiful services, the discharge of which, by a special dispensation, was entrusted to himself.

(Tr. cxix. 2) He does this to provide as it were another son for His mother in his place; And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own. Unto his own what? Was not John one of those who said, Lo, we have left all, and followed Thee? (Mat. 19:27) He took her then to his own, i. e. not to his farm, for he had none, but to his care, for of this he was master.

When Christ suffered on the cross, the blessed Virgin was present, accepting and consenting to the divine will. And it pleased her that the price of her womb should be offered on the cross for us. He said to his mother: "Woman, behold your son," as if he were saying: it is necessary for you to be without me, and for me to be without you; and you yourself, as a holy woman, conceived him, and as a devout woman, you offer him; may it please you, O Virgin, that I redeem the human race and appease God. And lest she be left desolate, he said to the disciple: "Behold, your mother"; he gave a virgin man to the Virgin.

Then he says to the disciple: Behold, your mother: as if to say: guard her as a mother. And from that hour the disciple took her into his own. Here is noted the acceptance of the commendation; into his own, that is, as his mother, he received her, so that he might honor, guard, and keep her, as a son does a mother. But Augustine reads that text as: into his own things, so that it is an accusative plural: and he asks: How into his own things, when he had no possessions of his own? And he answers: into his own, namely duties, services, and acts of kindness, not into possessions, which he did not have.

It is asked why the Lord thus commended his Mother, when above in chapter two he had responded so harshly: What is it to me and to you, woman? Augustine responds, and it is found in the Gloss: "Because then, about to perform divine works, he repelled his Mother as though unknown; now he showed that the hour had come which he then foretold, in which, about to die, he acknowledges her from whom he had been born as a mortal, and suffering human things, with human affection he commends her to a human, and by his example teaches that care should be rendered to parents by devoted children." The reason, moreover, why he commends her to John, on the part of the Lord is touched upon in the text, because he especially loved him; but on his own part it is passed over in silence; and the Saints say that it was "so that a virgin might guard the Virgin."

Christ here wanted to confirm the commandment that is clearly emphasized in the Law: "Honor your father and mother that it may be well with you." … Honoring one's parents is surely a very precious virtue. And how else would we learn the importance of that love—even when we are overwhelmed by a flood of intolerable calamities—except by this primary example that Christ offers us? It is one thing to be mindful of the holy commandments in times of peace and quietness and quite another to fulfill your duty during the storms and troubles of life.

The virgin mother, when wine was lacking, wanted Jesus to do a miracle. She was at once answered, "Woman, what have I to do with you?" as if to say plainly, The fact that I can do a miracle comes to me from my Father, not my mother. For it was from the nature of his Father that he could do miracles but from the nature of his mother that he could die. When he was on the cross, then, in dying he acknowledged his mother whom he commended to the disciple, saying, "Behold your mother." And so, when he says, "Woman, what have I to do with you? My hour is not yet come," he is in effect saying, In the miracle, which I did not from your nature, I do not acknowledge you. When the hour of death shall come, however, I shall acknowledge you as my mother, since it is from you that I can die.

For we judge people's virtue not by their sex but by their character, and we hold those to be worthy of the highest glory who have renounced both rank and wealth. It was for this reason that Jesus loved the Evangelist John more than the other disciples. For John was of noble birth and known to the high priest, yet he was so little intimidated by the plotting of the Jews that he introduced Peter into his court and was the only one of the apostles bold enough to take his stand before the cross. For it was he who took the Savior's parent to his own home. It was the virgin son who received the virgin mother as a legacy from the Lord.

Therefore, when the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ was hanging on the tree fastened by the nails of the cross for the life of the whole world, he saw about the cross his mother standing, and John the Evangelist, whom he peculiarly loved above the rest of the apostles because he alone of them was a virgin in the body. He gave him, therefore, the charge of holy Mary, saying to him, "Behold your mother!" And he said to her, "Behold your son!" From that hour the holy mother of God remained especially in the care of John, as long as she lived. And when the apostles had divided the world by lot for preaching, she settled in the house of his parents near Mount Olivet.

So this disciple took Mary to his own home, for the Pure One was entrusted to the pure one. See how the female sex is steadfast in troubles, while the men all abandoned the Lord. Truly He came who strengthens the weak and accepts the lowly.

2442 As to the second, he says, Behold, your mother! so that John will care for her as much as a son cares for his mother; and Mary is to love John as a mother loves her son.

2443 The Evangelist shows the obedience of the disciple when he says, and from that hour the disciple took her to his own. For Bede, this should read as his own (in suam); and so the meaning is, the disciple, John, took her, the mother of Jesus, as his own, mother. But according to Augustine, and agreeing with the Greek text, we should read it as to his own (in qua), not to his own home, for John was one of those who said, "We have left everything and followed you" (Mt 19:27); Rather, the disciple took Mary to his own guardianship, to eagerly and respectfully care for her.