2 Afterfeast of the Nativity of Christ

God, therefore, is uniquely good, and this he cannot lose. He is good. He is not good by sharing in any other good, because the good by which he is good is himself. But, when a finite human being is good, his goodness derives from God, because he cannot be his own good. All who become good do so through his Spirit. Our nature has been created to attain to him through acts of its own will. If we are to become good, it is important for us to receive and hold what he gives, who is good in himself.

But Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone." Because he had called the teacher good and had not confessed him as God or the Son of God, he learned that, although a holy man, in comparison to God, no one is good, about whom it is said, "Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good" (Psalm 106). However, the one God who is good is not to be understood as the Father alone, but also the Son who says, "I am the good shepherd" (John 10); and also the Holy Spirit, because the Father will give the good Spirit from heaven to those asking him (Luke 11), that is, the one and indivisible Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is the only and one God, who is good. Therefore, the Lord does not deny that he is good, but signifies that he is God; he does not deny that he is a good teacher, but testifies that no teacher is good except God. This is the chastity of youthful innocence, which is set before us to be imitated if we want to enter the kingdom of God. It should indeed be noted that justice, kept to the time of the law, not only conferred the good things of the earth but also eternal life to its practitioners.

(ubi sup.) But by this one God, who is good, we must not only understand the Father, but also the Son, who says, I am the good Shepherd; (John 10:11) and also the Holy Ghost, because it is said, The Father which is in heaven will give the good Spirit to them that ask him. (Luke 2:15. Vulg.) For the One and Undivided Trinity itself, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is the Only and One good God. The Lord, therefore, does not deny Himself to be good, but implies that He is God; He does not deny that He is good Master, but He declares that no master is good but God.

The rich man called Jesus "good," as if he were offering him a favor, just as some favor others with honorary titles. [The Lord] fled from that by which people favored him, so that he might show that he had received this goodness from the Father through nature and generation, and not [merely] in name. "Only one is good," [he said], and did not remain silent, but added, "the Father," so that he might show that the Son is good in just the way that the Father is good.

The words, "None is good" are a reply to the young ruler who was testing him and had borne witness to his goodness as a human being. Consummate goodness, he meant, belongs to God alone, though the word "good" can be derivatively applied to human beings.

He who is by nature God of God must possess the nature of his origin, which God possesses. The indistinguishable unity of a living nature cannot be divided by the birth of a living nature. But the troublers of church unity, under cover of the saving confession of the gospel faith, are subversively trying to take captive the truth by undermining it. By forcing their own interpretations on words spoken with other meanings and intentions, they are robbing the Son of his distinctive unity [with the Father].

A complete understanding of the reply must come from the reason that prompted the question, for the answer will be directed to the matter that led to the inquiry.… He voiced his objection to the title of "good master" in such a way as to challenge the faith of the questioner rather than the designation of himself as a master or as good.

They affirm, then, concerning the substance of the seed which is a cause of all existent things, that it is none of these, but that it produces and forms all things that are made, expressing themselves thus: "I become what I wish, and I am what I am: on account of this I say, that what puts all things in motion is itself unmoved. For what exists remains forming all things, and nought of existing things is made." He says that this (one) alone is good, and that what is spoken by the Saviour is declared concerning this (one): "Why do you say that am good? One is good, my Father which is in the heavens, who causeth His sun to rise upon the just and unjust, and sendeth rain upon saints and sinners." But who the saintly ones are on whom He sends the rain, and the sinners on whom the same sends the rain, this likewise we shall afterwards declare with the rest. And this is the great and secret and unknown mystery of the universe, concealed and revealed among the Egyptians. For Osiris, (the Naassene) says, is in temples in front of Isis; and his pudendum stands exposed, looking downwards, and crowned with all its own fruits of things that are made. And (he affirms) that such stands not only in the most hallowed temples chief of idols, but that also, for the information of all, it is as it were a light not set under a bushel, but upon a candlestick, proclaiming its message upon the housetops, in all byways, and all streets, and near the actual dwellings, placed in front as a certain appointed limit and termination of the dwelling, and that this is denominated the good (entity) by all. For they style this good-producing, not knowing what they say. And the Greeks, deriving this mystical (expression) from the Egyptians, preserve it until this day. For we behold, says (the Naassene), statues of Mercury, of such a figure honoured among them.

Marcion, adopting these sentiments, rejected altogether the generation of our Saviour. He considered it to be absurd that tinder the (category of a) creature fashioned by destructive Discord should have been the Logos that was an auxiliary to Friendship-that is, the Good Deity. (His doctrine,) however, was that, independent of birth, (the Logos) Himself descended from above in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, and that, as being intermediate between the good and bad Deity, He proceeded to give instruction in the synagogues. For if He is a Mediator, He has been, he says, liberated from the entire nature of the Evil Deity. Now, as he affirms, the Demiurge is evil, and his works. For this reason, he affirms, Jesus came down unbegotten, in order that He might be liberated from all (admixture of) evil. And He has, he says, been liberated from the nature of the Good One likewise, in order that He may be a Mediator, as Paul states, and as Himself acknowledges: "Why call ye me good? there is one good," These, then, are the opinions of Marcion, by means of which he made many his dupes, employing the conclusions of Empedocles. And he transferred the philosophy invented by that (ancient speculator) into his own system of thought, and (out of Empedocles) constructed his (own) impious heresy. But I consider that this has been sufficiently refuted by us, and that I have not omitted any opinion of those who purloin their opinions from the Greeks, and act despitefully towards the disciples of Christ, as if they had become teachers to them of these (tenets). But since it seems that we have sufficiently explained the doctrines of this (heretic), let us see what Carpocrates says.

The question is something like a priest who, while inwardly despising his bishop, yet continues to address him openly as "bishop." Whereupon the bishop answers, "To you I am not the bishop; you may leave my presence."

There is no other secondary goodness existing in the Son than that which is in the Father. So the Savior himself rightly says in the Gospel that "none is good save one, God the Father." The purpose of this statement is to make it understood that the Son is not of some other ancillary "goodness," but of that alone which is in the Father; whose image he is rightly called. For he neither springs from any other source than from original goodness itself (if that were so, there would seem to be a different goodness in the Son from that which is in the Father), nor has the goodness that is in him any dissimilarity or divergence from that of the Father. Accordingly we ought not to imagine that there is some kind of blasphemy in the saying that "none is good save one, God the Father." These words are not to be taken as a denial that either Christ or the Holy Spirit is good. But, as we said before, the original goodness must be believed to reside in God the Father, and from him both the Son and Holy Spirit undoubtedly draw into themselves the nature of that goodness existing in the font from which the one is born and the other proceeds. If then there are any other things called good in the Scriptures such as an angel, or a man, or a servant, or a treasure, or a good heart, or a good tree, all these are so called by an inexact use of the word, since the goodness contained in them is accidental and not essential.

The good, then, is the same as the one who incomparably is. Over against good is evil or wickedness. Over against the one who incomparably is, is merely that which is not. So it follows that evil and corruption are, finally, that which becomes nothing. This, perhaps, is what has led some to affirm that the devil is not created by God. In respect that he is the devil he is not the work of God, but he who is the devil is a created being, and as a creature nonetheless remains a work of God, since there is nothing created that is not created by God. Think of it this way: A murderer is not a work of God insofar as he murders, while we may still say that insofar as he is a human being, God made him.

"But," say they, "God is `good, 'and `most good, ' and `pitiful-hearted, 'and `a pitier, 'and `abundant in pitiful-heartedness, ' which He holds `dearer than all sacrifice, ' `not thinking the sinner's death of so much worth as his repentance', `a Saviour of all men, most of all of believers.

And why did Christ answer him thus: "No one is good"? Because he approached Christ as a mere man and as one of many teachers. Christ speaks as if to say: "If you consider Me good as a mere teacher, then in comparison with God no man is good; if you acknowledge Me as good as God, then why do you call Me merely a teacher?" By such words Christ wishes to convey a higher understanding of Himself, so that the man might recognize Him as God. Moreover, for the correction of the young man, the Lord also gives him another lesson: if he wishes to converse with someone, he should speak without flattery, and should know the one root and source of goodness to be God alone, and render Him due honor.

Therefore the Lord intended by these words to raise the mind of the young man, so that he might know Him to be God. But He also implies another thing by these words, that when you have to converse with a man, you should not flatter him in your conversation, but look back upon God, the root and fount of goodness, and do honour to Him.

The rich man asked the good teacher what he should do to gain eternal life. He regarded the good teacher as a man and nothing more (as distinct from the assumption that He is good as God incarnate). Hear the good teacher respond to him: if he wishes to enter into life, he should keep the commandments; that he should remove from himself the bitterness of malice and wickedness; that he should not kill, or commit adultery, or steal, or bear false witness, in order that dry land may appear and bring forth the honor of mother and father and the love of our neighbor.

(ubi sup.) But observe that the righteousness of the law, when kept in its own time, conferred not only earthly goods, but also eternal life on those who chose it. Wherefore the Lord's answer to one who enquires concerning everlasting life is, Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill; for this is the childlike blamelessness which is proposed to us, if we would enter the kingdom of heaven.

I who write this have greatly loved the total devotion of which the Lord spoke when he once said to the rich young man: "Go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and come, follow me." I have so loved it that I have indeed acted upon it myself, not by my own strength but by his assisting grace. The apostles were the first to follow in the practice of this complete self-giving. One who gives up both what one owns and what one desires to own, gives up the whole world.

Go, sell whatever you have, and give, etc. Whoever wishes to be perfect ought to sell what he has, and not sell part of it like Ananias and Sapphira, but sell everything, and when he has sold it, give everything to the poor, and thus prepare for himself a treasure in the kingdom of heaven. Nor is this sufficient for perfection unless, after despising riches, he follows the Savior, that is, having forsaken evil, he does good. For it is easier to despise a purse than a will. Many, leaving behind riches, do not follow the Lord. However, he follows the Lord who is His imitator and walks in His footsteps. For he who says he believes in Christ ought to walk as He walked.

(ubi sup.) For God loves those who keep the commandments of the law, though they be inferior; nevertheless, He shows to those who would be perfect the deficiency of the law, for He came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it. Wherefore there follows: And said unto him, One thing thou lackest; go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me; (Matt. 5:17) for whosoever would be perfect ought to sell all that he has, not a part, like Ananias and Sapphira, but the whole.

Again, Mark 10: Go, sell whatever you have and give to the poor: The Gloss: "Not a part, as Ananias did"; but he who gives everything, reserving nothing for himself, most fully does what the Lord counsels, reserving nothing for himself, neither in common nor in particular; and he who does this acts most perfectly: therefore etc.

What that man heard, most beloved, we, too, have heard. The gospel of Christ is in heaven, but it does not cease to speak on earth. Let us not be dead to him, for he thunders. Let us not be deaf, for he shouts. If you are unwilling to commit to full obedience, do what you can. But here is the radical divine requirement: "Sell all that you have, and give to the poor; and come, follow me." The lesser road of the law says: You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not seek false witness, you shall not steal, honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself."

He exercises the duties of goodness when he opens the treasures of heaven and becomes himself a guide to them. He abhors whatever is offered to him merely as a man. Yet he makes it clear that he is no stranger to those qualities attributed to God. While recognizing the one God as good, he himself speaks of and performs those very actions which are characteristic of the incomparable power, goodness and nature of God.

This is why those who are rich find it hard to enter the kingdom of heaven. For it is a kingdom which desires for its citizens a soul that soars aloft free from all ties and hindrances. "Go your way," the Lord said, "and sell" not a part of your substance but "all that you have, and give to the poor";46 not to your friends or kinsfolk or relatives, nor to your wife or to your children.… When once you have put your hand to the plough, you must not look back. When once you stand on the housetop, you must think no more of your clothes within. To escape your Egyptian mistress, you must abandon the cloak that belongs to this world. Even Elijah, in his quick translation to heaven could not take his mantle with him, but left in the world the garments of the world.

(in Evan. tom. xv. 14) For in that He loved, or kissed him, He appears to affirm the truth of his profession, in saying that he had fulfilled all those things; for on applying His mind to him, He saw that the man answered with a good conscience.

(Cat. in Marc. Oxon.) It is worthy of enquiry, however, how He loved a man, who, He knew, would not follow Him? But this is so much as to say, that since he was worthy of love in the first instance, because he observed the things of the law from his youth, so in the end, though he did not take upon himself perfection, he did not suffer a lessening of his former love. For although he did not pass the bounds of humanity, nor follow the perfection of Christ, still he was not guilty of any sin, since he kept the law according to the capability of a man, and in this mode of keeping it, Christ loved himq.

On account of this passion, having heard the Lord's words, "Go, sell... and give to the poor," he "went away sorrowful." Note here that the Lord did not say: sell what you have bit by bit and give it away, but sell it all at once and give it away, and only to the poor, not to flatterers and not to the debauched; then: "follow Me," that is, adopt every other virtue as well, for there are many who, though not covetous, are not humble, or though humble, are not sober, or have some other vice. Therefore the Lord does not say merely "sell and give to the poor," but "come, follow Me, taking up the cross," which means to be ready to die for His sake.

And when he has sold it, to give it to the poor, not to stage-players and luxurious persons.

But because there are many poor who are not humble, but are drunkards or have some other vice, for this reason He says, And come, follow me.

Such, O my soul, are the miseries that attend on riches. They are gained with toil and kept with fear. They are enjoyed with danger and lost with grief. It is hard to be saved if we have them; and impossible if we love them; and scarcely can we have them, but we shall love them inordinately. Teach us, O Lord, this difficult lesson: to manage conscientiously the goods we possess, and not covetously desire more than you give to us.

And looking around, Jesus said to His disciples: How difficult it is for those who have riches to enter the kingdom, etc. It is clear indeed that those who strive here to multiply riches neglect to seek the joys of another life: but there is much difference between having and loving riches. Many indeed, having them, do not love; many, not having them, love. Similarly, others both have and love. Others rejoice neither to have nor to love the riches of the world, whose state is safer, because they can say with the Apostle: For to us the world is crucified, and we to the world (Gal. V). Hence Solomon does not say, he who has, but he who loves riches will not enjoy their fruits (Eccl. V). And the Lord Himself, explaining to the disciples who were amazed at the words of this sentence, added saying:

But there is a great difference between having riches, and loving them; wherefore also Solomon says not, He that hath silver, but, He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied, with silver. (Eccl. 5:10)

The Christian view is that men were created to be in a certain relationship to God (if we are in that relation to Him, the right relation to one another will follow inevitably). Christ said it was difficult for "the rich" to enter the Kingdom of Heaven,1 referring, no doubt, to "riches" in the ordinary sense. But I think it really covers riches in every sense—good fortune, health, popularity, and all the things one wants to have. All these things tend—just as money tends—to make you feel independent of God, because if you have^them you are happy already and contented in this life. You don't want to turn away to anything more, and so you try to rest in a shadowy happiness as if it could last forever. But God wants to give you a real and eternal happiness. Consequently He may have to take all these "riches" away from you: if He doesn't, you will go on relying on them. It sounds cruel, doesn't it? But I am beginning to find out that what people call the cruel doctrines are really the kindest ones in the long run. I used to think it was a "cruel" doctrine to say that troubles and sorrows were "punishments." But I find in practice that when you are in trouble, the moment you regard it as a "punishment," it becomes easier to bear. If you think of this world as a place intended simply for our happiness, you find it quite intolerable: think of it as a place of training and correction and it's not so bad.

Imagine a set of people all living in the same building. Half of them think it is a hotel, the other half think it is a prison. Those who think it a hotel might regard it as quite intolerable, and those who thought it was a prison might decide that it was really surprisingly comfortable. So that what seems the ugly doctrine is one that comforts and strengthens you in the end. The people who try to hold an optimistic view of this world would become pessimists: the people who hold a pretty stern view of it become optimistic.

The dangers of apparent self-sufficiency explain why Our Lord regards the vices of the feckless and dissipated so much more leniently than the vices that lead to worldly success. Prostitutes are in no danger of finding their present life so satisfactory that they cannot turn to God: the proud, the avaricious, the self-righteous, are in that danger.

The rich man "went away sad," as you have heard, and the Lord says: "With what difficulty will they who have riches enter the kingdom of God!" At length the disciples became very sad when they heard this and they said: "If this is so, who then can be saved?" Rich and poor, listen to Christ: I am speaking to God's people. Most of you are poor, but you too must listen carefully to understand. And you had best listen even more intently if you glory in your poverty. Beware of pride, lest the humble rich surpass you. Beware of wickedness, lest the pious rich confound you. Beware of drunkenness, lest the sober excel you.

Again, "Don't sail on land" is a Pythagorean saw, and shows that taxes and similar contracts, being troublesome and fluctuating, ought to be declined. Wherefore also the Word says that the tax-gatherers shall be saved with difficulty.

Let this teach the prosperous that they are not to neglect their own salvation, as if they had been already foredoomed, nor, on the other hand, to cast wealth into the sea, or condemn it as a traitor and an enemy to life, but learn in what way and how to use wealth and obtain life.

Note what kind of riches it is that God loves. Note what wealth does he demand that we should store up for children. Note what possessions he especially orders us to guard: faith, fear of God, modesty, holiness, and discipline. Nothing earthly, nothing base, nothing perishable or transitory.

For as it is disagreeable to walk among thistles with naked feet, so also it is hard for such to enter the kingdom of God. But by all these the repentance of the rich is rendered difficult.

What am I to fasten on as the cause of this madness, except the weakness of faith, ever prone, to the concupiscences of worldly joys?-which, indeed, is chiefly found among the wealthier; for the more any is rich, and inflated with the name of "matron," the more capacious house does she require for her burdens, as it were a field wherein ambition may run its course. To such the churches look paltry. A rich man is a difficult thing (to find) in the house of God; and if such an one is (found there), difficult (is it to find such) unmarried.

It is not wealth in itself that is evil, but those who hoard it are evil and worthy of condemnation, for one ought not to have it, that is, to keep it for oneself, but to put it to good use. It is called wealth precisely because it is meant for beneficial use, not for hoarding. Therefore it is difficult for those who hoard and lock it away to "enter the Kingdom of God." And the word "difficult" here means the same as impossible. It is indeed exceedingly difficult for a rich man to be saved.

He says not here, that riches are bad, but that those are bad who only have them to watch them carefully; for He teaches us not to have them, that is, not to keep or preserve them, but to use them in necessary things.

Little children, how difficult it is for those who trust in riches to enter the kingdom of God. Where it must be noted that he did not say, how impossible, but how difficult it is. For what is impossible cannot be done at all. What is difficult can be done with toil. For it can indeed be done, but with great labor, with the help of God's grace, that those who have riches, or trust in riches, divesting themselves of the fetters of avarice, may enter the gate of the heavenly kingdom: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle," etc. (Matt. XIX). If it is easier for a camel, with its large and enormous limbs, to penetrate the narrow eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, then no rich man shall enter the kingdom of God. And how is it that in the Gospel, Matthew, Zacchaeus, and Joseph, or in the Old Testament, many rich men entered the kingdom of God? Unless perhaps because they learned, by the inspiration of the Lord, to consider riches as nothing or to forsake them completely from their whole heart. For did David trust in the riches of his kingdom? Who also sings of himself: "For I am poor and needy" (Psalm XXIV); and exhorts others, "If riches increase, do not set your heart on them" (Psalm LXI). I believe he did not dare to say, do not receive them. Is it believable that Abraham preferred his wealth to the Lord, for whom he did not hesitate to strike his only heir? In a higher sense, it is easier for Christ to suffer for the lovers of the world than for the lovers of the world to be converted to Christ. For by the name of the camel, he wanted himself to be understood, who willingly bore the burdens of our humility and infirmity. For in whom is it more clearly understood than in him, what is written: "The greater you are, humble yourself in all things" (Eccli. III)? By the needle he signifies the nails, by the nails the sufferings endured in his passion. Therefore, he says the eye of the needle is the straits of his passion. By which torn, he condescended to mend, that is, to restore as it were, the garments of our nature; so that after the fall, being better reformed, we may rejoice at the testimony of the Apostle saying: "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Gal. III).

Therefore the Lord unfolds the words of His former saying to His astonished disciples, as follows: But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard it is for them that trust in their riches to enter the kingdom of God. Where we must observe that He says not, how impossible, but how hard; for what is impossible cannot in any way come to pass, what is difficult can be compassed, though with labour.

(ubi sup.) But the Lord said this to His disciples, who were poor and possessed nothing, in order to teach them not to blush at their poverty, and as it were to make an excuse to them, and give them a reason, why He had not allowed them to possess any thing. It goes on: And the disciples were astonished at his words; for it is plain, since they themselves were poor, that they were anxious for the salvation of others.

(ubi sup.) How then could either in the Gospel, Matthew and Joseph, or in the Old Testament, very many rich persons, enter into the kingdom of God, unless it be that they learned through the inspiration of God either to count their riches as nothing, or to quit them altogether. Or in a higher sense, it is easier for Christ to suffer for those who love Him, than for the lovers of this world to turn to Christ; for under the name of camel, He wished Himself to be understood, because He bore the burden of our weakness; and by the needle, He understands the prickings, that is, the pains of His Passion. By the eye of a needle, therefore, He means the straits of His Passion, by which He, as it were, deigned to mend the torn garments of our nature.

The Saviour by no means has excluded the rich on account of wealth itself, and the possession of property, nor fenced off salvation against them; if they are able and willing to submit their life to God's commandments, and prefer them to transitory objects, and if they would look to the Lord with steady eye, as those who look for the nod of a good helmsman, what he wishes, what he orders, what he indicates, what signal he gives his mariners, where and whence he directs the ship's course. For what harm does one do, who, previous to faith, by applying his mind and by saving has collected a competency? Or what is much less reprehensible than this, if at once by God, who gave him his life, he has had his home given him in the house of such men, among wealthy people, powerful in substance, and pre-eminent in opulence? For if, in consequence of his involuntary birth in wealth, a man is banished from life, rather is he wronged by God, who created him, in having vouchsafed to him temporary enjoyment, and in being deprived of eternal life. And why should wealth have ever sprung from the earth at all, if it is the author and patron of death?

But if one is able in the midst of wealth to turn from its power, and to entertain moderate sentiments, and to exercise self-command, and to seek God alone, and to breathe God and walk with God, such a poor man submits to the commandments, being free, unsubdued, free of disease, unwounded by wealth. But if not, "sooner shall a camel enter through a needle's eye, than such a rich man reach the kingdom of God."

Let then the camel, going through a narrow and strait way before the rich man, signify something loftier; which mystery of the Saviour is to be learned in the "Exposition of first Principles and of Theology."

Only the Christian Church can offer any rational objection to a complete confidence in the rich. For she has maintained from the beginning that the danger was not in man's environment, but in man. Further, she has maintained that if we come to talk of a dangerous environment, the most dangerous environment of all is the commodious environment. I know that the most modern manufacture has been really occupied in trying to produce an abnormally large needle. I know that the most recent biologists have been chiefly anxious to discover a very small camel. But if we diminish the camel to his smallest, or open the eye of the needle to its largest--if, in short, we assume the words of Christ to have meant the very least that they could mean, His words must at the very least mean this--that rich men are not very likely to be morally trustworthy. Christianity even when watered down is hot enough to boil all modern society to rags. The mere minimum of the Church would be a deadly ultimatum to the world. For the whole modern world is absolutely based on the assumption, not that the rich are necessary (which is tenable), but that the rich are trustworthy, which (for a Christian) is not tenable. You will hear everlastingly, in all discussions about newspapers, companies, aristocracies, or party politics, this argument that the rich man cannot be bribed. The fact is, of course, that the rich man is bribed; he has been bribed already. That is why he is a rich man. The whole case for Christianity is that a man who is dependent upon the luxuries of this life is a corrupt man, spiritually corrupt, politically corrupt, financially corrupt. There is one thing that Christ and all the Christian saints have said with a sort of savage monotony. They have said simply that to be rich is to be in peculiar danger of moral wreck.

Instead of looking at books and pictures about the New Testament I looked at the New Testament. There I found an account, not in the least of a person with his hair parted in the middle or his hands clasped in appeal, but of an extraordinary being with lips of thunder and acts of lurid decision, flinging down tables, casting out devils, passing with the wild secrecy of the wind from mountain isolation to a sort of dreadful demagogy; a being who often acted like an angry god--and always like a god. Christ had even a literary style of his own, not to be found, I think, elsewhere; it consists of an almost furious use of the a fortiori. His "how much more" is piled one upon another like castle upon castle in the clouds. The diction used about Christ has been, and perhaps wisely, sweet and submissive. But the diction used by Christ is quite curiously gigantesque; it is full of camels leaping through needles and mountains hurled into the sea. Morally it is equally terrific; he called himself a sword of slaughter, and told men to buy swords if they sold their coats for them. That he used other even wilder words on the side of non-resistance greatly increases the mystery; but it also, if anything, rather increases the violence. We cannot even explain it by calling such a being insane; for insanity is usually along one consistent channel. The maniac is generally a monomaniac. Here we must remember the difficult definition of Christianity already given; Christianity is a superhuman paradox whereby two opposite passions may blaze beside each other. The one explanation of the Gospel language that does explain it, is that it is the survey of one who from some supernatural height beholds some more startling synthesis.

(ubi sup.) Or else, after saying difficult, He then shows that it is impossible, and that not simply, but with a certain vehemence; and he shows this by an example, saying, It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

There is no compelling necessity for you to store up large earthly treasures for your children. You would do better to make your offspring treasures of God than make them richer in worldly goods.

This is evident from the example which the Lord adds, saying: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God." By the name "camel" understand either the animal itself or a thick rope (cable) used on large ships. Thus, for a man, so long as he is rich, it is impossible to be saved.

It may be that by camel, we should understand the animal itself, or else that thick cable, which is used for large vessels.

And Jesus, looking at them, said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God." It is not to be understood that the greedy and proud, who were signified by the name of that rich man, will enter the kingdom of heaven with their greed and pride: but it is possible for God, that through His word, as we see both to have been done and to be done daily, that they are converted from the greed for temporal things to the love of eternal things, and from pernicious pride to salutary humility.

It goes on; And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God; which we must not take to mean, that covetous and proud persons can enter into the kingdom of Heaven with their covetousness and pride, but that it is possible with God that they should be converted from covetousness and pride to charity and lowliness.

The absolutely impossible may also be called the intrinsically impossible because it carries its impossibility within itself, instead of borrowing it from other impossibilities which in their turn depend upon others. It has no unless clause attached to it. It is impossible under all conditions and in all worlds and for all agents.

"All agents" here includes God Himself. His Omnipotence means power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense. This is no limit to His power. If you choose to say "God can give a creature free-will and at the same time withhold free-will from it," you have not succeeded in saying anything about God: meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix to them the two other words "God can". It remains true that all things are possible with God: the intrinsic impossibilities are not things but nonentities. It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives; not because His power meets an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.

But the Lord replies, "Because what is impossible with men is possible with God." This again is full of great wisdom. For a man by himself working and toiling at freedom from passion achieves nothing. But if he plainly shows himself very desirous and earnest about this, he attains it by the addition of the power of God. For God conspires with willing souls. But if they abandon their eagerness, the spirit which is bestowed by God is also restrained. For to save the unwilling is the part of one exercising compulsion; but to save the willing, that of one showing grace.

(ubi sup.) And the reason why He says that this is the work of God is, that He may show that he who is put into this path by God, has much need of grace; from which it is proved, that great is the reward of those rich men, who are willing to follow the 1discipline of Christ.

Orthodox: The Lord God wishes nothing inconsistent with his nature, and is able to do all that he wishes, and what he wishes is appropriate and agreeable to his own nature.… Eranistes: Nothing is impossible to almighty God. Orthodox: Then according to your definition sin is possible to almighty God? Eranistes: By no means. Orthodox: Why? Eranistes: Because he does not wish it. Orthodox: Why does he not wish it? Eranistes: Because sin is foreign to his nature. Orthodox: Then there are many things which he cannot do, for there are many kinds of transgression. Eranistes: Nothing of this kind can be wished or done by God. Orthodox: Nor can those things which are contrary to the divine nature.… But not to be able in any of these respects is proof not of weakness, but of infinite power, and to be able would certainly be proof not of power but of impotence.

But with God this is possible. Christ said: "Make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous wealth" (Lk. 16:9). Do you see how all things become possible when we hear the Word of God? "With men this is impossible," that is, it is impossible when we reason in human terms. Some are puzzled how Christ said that "all things are possible with God." Can He then also sin? To this we answer that when Christ says "all things," He means all things that have real existence, but sin is not something that has real existence: sin is something insubstantial, inoperative, or in other words, sin belongs not to strength but to weakness, as the Apostle also says: "Christ, when we were still weak... died" (Rom. 5:6), and David says: "Their sorrows shall be multiplied" (Ps. 16:4). Therefore sin, as a weakness, is impossible for God. But can God, they ask, also make what has been as though it had not been? To this we say: God is Truth, and to make what has been as though it had not been is a lie. How then would Truth produce a lie? For this He would first have to change His own Essence. To speak in this way would be to say that God can cease to be God.

Or we must understand that by, with man it is impossible, but not with God, He means, that when we listen to God, it becomes possible, but as long as we keep our human notions, it is impossible. There follows, For all things are possible with God; when He says all things, you must understand, that have a being; which sin has not, for it is a thing without being and substance. Or else: sin does not come under the notion of strength, but of weakness, therefore sin, like weakness, is impossible with God. But can God cause that not to have been done which has been done? To which we answer, that God is Truth, but to cause that what has been done should not have been done, is falsehood. How then can truth do what is false? He must first therefore quit His own nature, so that they who speak thus really say, Can God cease to be God? which is absurd.

Or, He set forth the Prophets as it were winepresses, into which an abundant measure of the Holy Spirit, as of new wine, might flow in a teeming stream.

Or, The tower is the eminence of the Law, which ascended from earth to heaven, and from which, as from a watch-tower, the coming of Christ might be spied. And let it out to husbandmen.

(Verse 33.) Listen to another parable: There was a master of a house who planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a winepress in it and built a tower and leased it to tenants, and then went on a journey. This is what the Lord meant by the proverb: It is hard to kick against the goads (Acts 9:5). The chief priests and the elders of the people, who questioned the Lord, said to him, 'By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?' And they desired to attain wisdom in words, they are surpassed by their own skill; and they listen in parables, because they did not deserve to listen with an open face. This man, the head of the household, is the one who had two sons; and in another parable, he hired workers for his vineyard; who planted a vineyard, of which Isaiah speaks most fully in the Song, bringing it to a conclusion: The vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel (Isaiah 5:7). And in the Psalm: You have brought a vine out of Egypt, he says, you have driven out the nations, and planted it (Psalm 80:9). And he surrounded her with a hedge, or with the walls of a city, or with the help of angels: and he dug into her a winepress, or an altar, or those things for pressing wine, which are noted in the title of three Psalms: the eightieth, and the eighty-third. And he built a tower: no doubt the temple, of which it is said through Micah: And you, O cloudy tower, daughter of Zion (Mic. 4:8). And he placed it for the farmers, whom elsewhere he called vineyard workers: who were hired at the first, third, sixth, ninth, and eleventh hour (Matt. 20). And he went on a journey: yes, not by a change of place; for how can God be absent where all things are fulfilled? And as it says through Jeremiah: I am a God who is near and not far away, says the Lord (Jeremiah 23:23). But he seems to be leaving the vineyard so as to leave the vine-dressers free will in their work.

He hath planted a vine of which Isaiah speaks, The vine of the Lord of Hosts is the house of Israel. (Isa. 5:7.) And hedged it round about; i. e. either the wall of the city, or the guardianship of Angels.

A winepress, that is to say, An altar; or those winepresses after which the three Psalms, the 8th, the 80th, and the 83d are entitled, that is to say, the martyrs.

And built a tower therein, that is, the Temple, of which it is said by Micah, And thou, O cloudy tower of the daughter of Sion. (Mic. 4:8.)

Not a change of place, for God, by whom all things are filled, cannot be absent from any place; but He seems to be absent from the vineyard, that He may leave the vine-dressers a freedom of acting.

Many things doth He intimate by this parable, God's providence, which had been exercised towards them from the first; their murderous disposition from the beginning; that nothing had been omitted of whatever pertained to a heedful care of them; that even when prophets had been slain, He had not turned away from them, but had sent His very Son; that the God both of the New and of the Old Testament was one and the same; that His death should effect great blessings; that they were to endure extreme punishment for the crucifixion, and their crime; the calling of the Gentiles, the casting out of the Jews.

Therefore He putteth it after the former parable, that He may show even hereby the charge to be greater, and highly unpardonable. How, and in what way? That although they met with so much care, they were worse than harlots and publicans, and by so much.

And observe also both His great care, and the excessive idleness of these men. For what pertained to the husbandmen, He Himself did, the hedging it round about, the planting the vineyard, and all the rest, and He left little for them to do; to take care of what was there, and to preserve what was given to them. For nothing was left undone, but all accomplished; and not even so did they gain, and this, when they had enjoyed such great blessings from Him. For when they had come forth out of Egypt, He gave a law, and set up a city, and built a temple, and prepared an altar.

"And went into a far country;" that He bore long with them, not always bringing the punishments close upon their sins; for by His going into a far country, He means His great long-suffering.

The householder is God, who in some parables is represented as a man. As it were a father condescending to the infant lisp of his little child, in order to instruct him.

Or, the hedge which God set round his people was His own Providence; and the winepress was the place of offerings.

Or, because God who had been with them in the cloud by day, and in the pillar of fire by night, (Exod. 13:21.) never after showed Himself to them in like manner. In Isaiah (Is. 5:7.) the people of the Jews is called the vineyard, and the threats of the householder are against the vineyard; but in the Gospel not the vineyard but the husbandmen are blamed. For perchance in the Gospel the vineyard is the kingdom of God, that is, the doctrine which is contained in holy Scripture; and a man's blameless life is the fruit of the vineyard. And the letter of Scripture is the hedge set round the vineyard, that the fruits which are hid in it should not be seen by those who are without. The depth of the oracles of God is the winepress of the vineyard, into which such as have profited in the oracles of God pour out their studies like fruit. The tower built therein is the word concerning God Himself, and concerning Christ's dispensations. This vineyard He committed to husbandmen, that is, to the people that was before us, both priests and laity, and went into a far country, by His departure giving opportunity to the husbandmen. The time of the vintage drawing near may be taken of individuals, and of nations. The first season of life is in infancy, when the vineyard has nought to show, but that it has in it the vital power. As soon as it comes to be able to speak, then is the time of putting forth buds. And as the child's soul progresses, so also does the vineyard, that is, the word of God; and after such progress the vineyard brings forth the ripe fruit of love, joy, peace, and the like. Moreover to the nation who received the Law by Moses, the time of fruit draweth near.

He is called man, by title, not by nature; in a kind of likeness, not in verity. For the Son knowing that by occasion of His human name He himself should be blasphemed as though he were mere man, spoke therefore of the Invisible God the Father as man; He who by nature is Lord of Angels and men, but by goodness their Father.

Or, by the hedge understand the protection of the holy fathers, who were set as a wall round the people of Israel.

Or, the winepress is the word of God, which tortures man when it contradicts his fleshly nature.

When, that is, Priests and Levites were constituted by the Law, and undertook the direction of the people. And as an husbandman, though he offer to his Lord of his own stock, does not please him so much as by giving him the fruit of his own vineyard; so the Priest does not so much please God by his own righteousness, as by teaching the people of God holiness; for his own righteousness is but one, but that of the people manifold. And went into a far country.

Morally; a vineyard has been let out to each of us to dress, when the mystery of baptism was given us, to be cultivated by action. Servants one, two, and three are sent us when Law, Psalm, and Prophecy are read, after whose instructions we are to work well. He that is sent is beaten and cast out when the word is contemned, or, which is worse, is blasphemed. He kills (as far as in him lies) the heir, who tramples under foot the Son, and does despite to the Spirit of grace. The wicked husbandman is destroyed, and the vineyard is given to another, when the gift of grace which the proud has contemned is given to the lowly.

He also introduces a parable of the mission to the vineyard of the Son (not the Father), who was sent after so many servants, and slain by the husbandmen, and avenged by the Father.

Yet another parable He brings to them, showing that though they were deemed worthy to receive an immeasurable degree of care for their condition, they did not get better. The "man, a householder" is the Lord Who in His love for man calls Himself a man. The vineyard is the Jewish people, planted by God in the land of promise. For He says, "Bring them in and plant them in Thy holy mountain" (Ex. 15:17). The hedge is the law which prevented them from mixing with the Gentiles; or, it is the holy angels who guarded Israel. The wine-press is the altar; the tower, the temple. The husbandmen are the teachers of the people, the Pharisees and the scribes. The householder, God, went into a far country when He no longer spoke to them in a pillar of cloud. Or, the departure of God into a far country is His long-suffering; for when He is long-suffering and not in hot pursuit of wrongdoers, demanding an account, He appears to be asleep or absent on a far journey.

"Hear another parable." The Lord had asked about the baptism, and they refused to answer; but now he questions covertly, so that they may not perceive; therefore he sets forth a parable, and does two things. First, he presents the parable; secondly, he demands their verdict, at "when therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen?" Concerning the first, three things. First, the benefit conferred is presented; secondly, the demand for recompense, at "and when the time of the fruits drew near" etc.; thirdly, the ingratitude, at "and the husbandmen laying hands on his servants" etc. Concerning the first, three things. First, the planting of the vineyard is presented; secondly, its adornment; thirdly, its leasing. He says therefore "there was a man, a householder, who planted a vineyard" etc. A similar passage is found in Isa 5:1, where it says: "A vineyard was made for my beloved on a horn of an olive tree." But here he says that the householder plants a vineyard. Some say that there he inveighs against the vineyard; hence he says: "What more could I have done for my vineyard?" But here against the husbandmen. Therefore it is explained in two ways according to Jerome and Chrysostom. The vineyard is called the Jewish people; Isa 5:7: "The vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel." It is against the husbandmen, because as regards the present, this malice did not proceed from the people, but from the rulers; John 7:48: "Hath any one of the rulers believed in him?" Therefore not against the vineyard. This vineyard is not the house of Israel, but the justice of God, which was secretly handed down in sacred Scripture; hence he says "there was a man, a householder, who planted a vineyard," i.e., the Jewish people; Ps 79:9: "Thou hast brought a vineyard out of Egypt." Or he placed justice in the teaching of the law. "And made a hedge round about it," for the protection of the vineyard; hence those things which are set for protection, whether they be the prayers of the saints, or the guardianship of angels, are called a hedge; hence Hosea 2:6: "I will hedge up thy way with thorns." But if the vineyard is called justice, by the hedge he means the hidden words of Scripture. For according to the mystical sense, the hidden things of Scripture are not to be disclosed to anyone, because "what is holy is not to be given to dogs," above (7:6). "And dug in it a winepress." A winepress is set up so that the wine of charity may be pressed out. If by the vineyard is understood the Jewish people, by the winepress is understood the altar of holocausts. Likewise, the martyrs are understood, who shed their blood for the faith; Isa 63:3: "I have trodden the winepress alone." Or it can also be understood as the order of prophets, in whom the wine of wisdom was pressed out. Or it can be called the depth of sacred Scripture. Likewise, all the fruit of the vineyard is gathered in the winepress: so whatever the soul can do, all should be gathered to the praise of God. "And built a tower." By the tower is understood the temple. Micah 4:8: "And thou, O cloudy tower of the flock, unto thee shall the first dominion come." Or the knowledge of God; Prov 18:10: "The name of the Lord is a strong tower." Then concerning the leasing: "and let it out to husbandmen," i.e., he established it on a fixed payment. The husbandmen are Moses and Aaron, who held the governance. Job 31:39: "If I have afflicted the soul of the tillers thereof." Gregory: those who are placed over the people. "He went abroad," the Lord, not by changing place, but by leaving man to his own free will. Sir 15:14: "God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his own counsel," i.e., he dismissed him to his own free will. Hence he is said to go abroad, when he does not inflict punishment for every sin. Or he did not appear so manifestly as before, namely, as when he appeared in the bush (Exod 3:2).

At each step of their wickedness the mercy of God was increased, and at each step of the Divine mercy the wickedness of the Jews increased; thus there was a strife between human wickedness and Divine goodness.

The season of fruit, He says, not of rent-paying, because this stiff-necked nation brings forth no fruit.

Or, the first servants who were sent were the Lawgiver Moses himself, and Aaron the first Priest of God; whom, having beaten them with the scourge of their tongue, they sent away empty; by the other servants understand the company of the Prophets.

"The time of the fruit drew near" during the years of the prophets. For the servants who were sent are the prophets who were abused in various ways by the husbandmen, that is, the false prophets and false teachers of those times. One they beat, as they did to Micah when Sedek struck him on the jaw (III Kings, or I Kings, 22:24); another they killed, as they did to Zechariah [the father of John the Forerunner] between the temple and the altar; another they stoned, as they did Zechariah, the son of Jodae the high priest (II Chron. 24:21).

"And when the time of the fruits drew near." Whoever makes anyone bear fruit, expects a benefit: and so the Lord expects that benefit be rendered to him for his glory. With respect to an individual, the fruit is not in childhood, but in full age; hence when one comes to adolescence, then he demands fruit: so when the people had been planted and the law given, he demanded fruit, and they did not acknowledge him. Jer 8:7: "The kite in the air hath known her time; but my people hath not known the judgment of the Lord." "He sent his servants," i.e., the prophets, "to the husbandmen," i.e., to the Jews, "to receive the fruits thereof," i.e., to induce men to act well. Below (28:34): "I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you will kill" etc.

(Verse 35-36) And the vinedressers took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. We read the letter of Paul to the Hebrews (Heb. XI); and from it we learn in great detail the sufferings endured by the servants of the Lord.

Beat them, as Jeremiah, killed them, as Isaiah, stoned them, as Naboth and Zacharias, whom they slew between the temple and the altar.

And "He sent His servants," that is, the prophets, "to receive the fruit;" that is, their obedience, the proof of it by their works. But they even here showed their wickedness, not only by failing to give the fruit, after having enjoyed so much care, which was the sign of idleness, but also by showing anger towards them that came. For they that had not to give when they owed, should not have been indignant, nor angry, but should have entreated. But they not only were indignant, but even filled their hands with blood, and while deserving punishment, themselves inflicted punishment.

Therefore He sent both a second, and a third company, both that the wickedness of these might be shown, and the love towards man of Him who sent them.

After this the malice is treated. And first with respect to the first group; secondly, with respect to the second; thirdly, with respect to the third. "And the husbandmen laying hands on his servants, beat one," as Micaiah, "killed another," as Isaiah, "and stoned another," as Naboth. Heb 11:37: "They were stoned, they were cut asunder, they were killed by the sword."

These more than the first who were sent, denote that time, when, after the preaching of single Prophets, a great number was sent forth together.

"Again he sent other servants." Likewise, he sent prophets individually, as Moses and Aaron and others; but after, in the time of David, he sent many companies of prophets. For the Lord wills to set his mercy against their malice. Hence "and they did to them in like manner." Deut 31:27: "You have always been contentious against the Lord."

By the Son sent at last, is denoted the advent of our Lord.

(Verse 37, 38.) But lastly, he sent his son to them, saying: They will respect my son. However, the farmers, upon seeing the son, said among themselves: This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and we shall have his inheritance. In the passage above, we read: Again, he sent other servants more than the previous ones, and they did the same to them. The patience of the householder is shown in that he sent them more frequently, in order to provoke the wicked tenants to repentance. But they treasured up wrath for themselves on the day of wrath (Rom. 2). Moreover, that which is joined: They fear for my son, he does not come from ignorance. For what does the head of the household not know, who in this place is understood as God the Father? But God is always said to be ambiguous, so that free will may be preserved for man. Let us ask Arius and Eunomius. Behold, the Father is said to be ignorant, and he tempers his judgement, and as far as you are concerned, he is proven to be lying. Whatever they may answer on behalf of the Father, let them understand it as being on behalf of the Son, who himself says that he does not know the day of consummation.

But when He says, They will reverence my Son, He does not speak as in ignorance. For what is there that this householder (by whom in this place God is intended) knows not? But God is thus spoken of as being uncertain, in order that free-will may be reserved for man.

Let us enquire of Arrius and Eunomius. See here the Father is said not to know somewhat. Whatever answer they make for the Father, let them understand the same of the Son, when He says that He knows not the day of the consummation of all things. (Mat. 22:36.)

And wherefore sent He not His Son immediately? In order that they might condemn themselves for the things done to the others, and leave off their wrath, and reverence Him when He came. There are also other reasons, but for the present let us go on to what is next. But what means, "It may be they will reverence?" It is not the language of one ignorant, away with the thought! but of one desiring to show the sin to be great; and without any excuse. Since Himself knowing that they would slay Him, He sent Him. But He saith, "They will reverence," declaring what ought to have been done, that it was their duty to have reverenced Him. Since elsewhere also He saith, "if perchance they will hear;" not in this case either being ignorant, but lest any of the obstinate should say, that His prediction was the thing that necessitated their disobedience, therefore He frames His expressions in this way, saying, "Whether they will," and, "It may be." For though they had been obstinate towards His servants, yet ought they to have reverenced the dignity of the Son.

He sent Him not as the bearer of a sentence of punishment against the guilty, but of an offer of repentance; He sent Him to put them to shame, not to punish them.

But some say, that it was after His incarnation, that Christ was called a Son in right of His baptism like the other saints, whom the Lord refutes by this place, saying, I will send my Son. Therefore when He thus meditated sending His Son after the Prophets, He must have been already His Son. Further, if He had been His Son in the same way as all the saints to whom the word of God was sent, He ought to have called the Prophets also His sons, as He calls Christ, or to call Christ His servant, as He calls the Prophets.

Later the Son of God was sent and He appeared in the flesh. He said, "They will reverence My Son," not unaware that they would kill Him, but signifying what ought to be. For, He says, they ought to honor the dignity of the Son even if they had killed the servants.

There follows thirdly: "and last of all he sent to them his son" etc., which was the height of consummate malice. And he does three things. First, the mercy of the Lord is presented; secondly, their malice; thirdly, the execution of the wicked plan. "And last of all he sent to them his son." Heb 1:1: "God, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all, in these days, hath spoken to us by his Son." "He sent to them his son, saying: they will reverence my son." But what is it that he says, "they will?" Did he not know? Jerome says that this doubtful way of speaking signifies the freedom of the will, to show what they were going to be; because he who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father. Or he speaks thus because some did reverence him.

What then do these? When they ought to have run unto Him, when they ought to have asked pardon for their offenses, they even persist more strongly in their former sins, they proceed to add unto their pollutions, forever throwing into the shade their former offenses by their later; as also He Himself declared when He said, "Fill ye up the measure of your fathers." For from the first the prophets used to charge them with these things, saying, "Your hands are full of blood;" and, "They mingle blood with blood;" and, "They build up Sion with blood."

But they did not learn self-restraint, albeit they received this commandment first, "Thou shalt not kill;" and had been commanded to abstain from countless other things because of this, and by many and various means urged to the keeping of this commandment.

Yet, for all that, they put not away that evil custom; but what say they, when they saw Him? Come, let us kill Him. With what motive, and for what reason? what of any kind had they to lay to His charge, either small or great? Is it that He honored you, and being God became man for your sakes, and wrought His countless miracles? or that He pardoned your sins? or that He called you unto a kingdom?

But see together with their impiety great was their folly, and the reason of His murder was full of much madness. "For let us kill Him," it is said, "and the inheritance shall be ours."

And where do they take counsel to kill Him? "Out of the vineyard."

Seest thou how He prophesies even the place where He was to be slain. "And they cast Him out, and slew Him."

Or we may suppose this fulfilled in the case of those Jews who, knowing Christ, believed in Him. But what follows, But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir, come let us kill him, and let us seize on the inheritance, was fulfilled in those who saw Christ, and knew Him to be the Son of God, yet crucified Him.

After His entry into the Temple, and having cast out those who sold the animals for the sacrifices, then they took counsel to kill Him, Come, let us kill him. For they reasoned among themselves, It will happen that the people hereby shall disuse the practice of sacrificing, which pertains to our gain, and shall be content to offer the sacrifice of righteousness, which pertains to the glory of God; and so the nation shall no more be our possession, but shall become God's. But if we shall kill Him, then there being none to seek the fruit of righteousness from the people, the practice of offering sacrifice shall continue, and so this people shall become our possession; as it follows, And the inheritance shall be ours. These are the usual thoughts of all worldly Priests, who take no thought how the people shall live without sin, but look to how much is offered in the Church, and esteem that the profit of their ministry.

By what they say, This is the Son, He manifestly proves that the rulers of the Jews crucified the Son of God, not through ignorance, but through jealousy. For they understood that it was He to whom the Father speaks by the Prophet, Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance (Ps. 2:8.) The inheritance given to the Son is the holy Church; an inheritance not left Him by His Father when dying, but wonderfully purchased by His own death.

Or, The Jews endeavoured by putting Him to death to seize upon the inheritance, when they strove to overthrow the faith which is through Him, and to substitute their own righteousness which is by the Law, and therewith to imbue the Gentiles. It follows, And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.

But the husbandmen saw Him and said, "This is the heir; come, let us kill Him." The Jews, too, said, "This is the Christ," and they crucified Him. They cast Him out of the vineyard, for the Lord was slain outside of the city. But since we would also say that the vineyard is the people, Christ was slain by the Pharisees, the evil husbandmen, outside the vineyard, that is, outside and apart from the will of the guileless people.

Then the purpose of malice is presented. And first, the scheming is presented; secondly, the plan; thirdly, the malice. "But the husbandmen seeing the son, said among themselves: this is the heir; come, let us kill him, and we shall have his inheritance;" for the son is truly the heir of his father, because what he asks, he obtains. Ps 2:8: "Ask of me, and I will give thee the Gentiles for thy inheritance." Likewise, he is the heir because whatever the Father has, he also has: for he is not called an heir as someone else who receives his inheritance upon the father's death, but because what is the Father's is always also his. But against this: "if they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory" (1 Cor 2:8). This is true if they had truly known; but they knew by conjecture. There follows the plan: "come, let us kill him." Wis 2:20: "Let us condemn him to a most shameful death." And what is the plan? "We shall have his inheritance." For they knew from the law that he was to rule over the Jewish people. Hence they feared lest he impose upon them the yoke of the law, and destroy their traditions. Therefore they would not endure the yoke of Christ; hence they endured the yoke of the Romans. Hence John 11:48: "Lest perhaps the Romans come, and take away our place and nation."

The householder in this parable is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. The vineyard he planted represents the Jewish people who were begotten from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, multiplied like the stars in the sky and the sand of the shore, liberated from the land of Egypt and the yoke of slavery, and led through the sea to the promised land, as the prophet said: "You brought a vine out of Egypt; you drove out the nations and planted it." The Lord planted the Jewish people in the promised land, flowing with milk and honey, so that they would bear the fruit of the commandments of God. "He surrounded it with a hedge" means that God fortified it with the protection of angels. The wine press he dug signifies the holy church, where the fruits of righteousness and holiness are gathered; just as the grapes are pressed only with great toil and effort, so also the holy martyrs are crushed like grapes and shed their blood only through great persecutions and tortures. The tower constructed in the middle of the vineyard is our Lord himself, who appeared like a strong tower in the midst of the holy church through the Virgin. Because of his presence, all the saints and martyrs are protected with spiritual weapons from their most wicked enemy, who is the devil. "When harvest time drew near, he sent his servants," that is, the prophets, "to the tenants," who were the teachers of the law, "to collect the fruit of the vineyard." He had already sent the prophets to them repeatedly to collect his fruit, but they were disdainful and rebellious toward the Lord and greeted his prophets with swords, beatings, stonings and other persecutions. They killed Isaiah, stoned Jeremiah, pursued Elijah and beheaded John the Baptist. Every nation that persecutes its teachers and fails to produce the fruit of the gospel is an accomplice to the Jews. "Finally, therefore, he sent his only son to them, saying, 'surely they will respect my son.' " The "only son" of the householder is the Lord, the Son of God, who came by the will of the Father to his vineyard, which is the Jewish people. "But when the tenants," who are the teachers of the law, "saw his son, they said to themselves, 'this is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours,' and they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him." They also crucified our Lord outside the city, while they shouted, "Crucify him! Crucify him!" Yet they did not in fact come to possess the inheritance of the law; instead, they sentenced themselves to death, for the Lord asked, "What will the owner of the vineyard do to the tenants when he comes?" They responded, "He will destroy the evil tenants and give the vineyard to other tenants who will produce its fruit in a timely manner." They condemned themselves by their own words, as the Lord implies when he speaks about himself and their faithlessness: "The stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; therefore, I say to you that the kingdom of God will be removed from you and given to a people producing its fruits."

Christ was cast out of Jerusalem, as out of the vineyard, to His sentence of punishment.

(Verse 39) And they apprehended him, cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. And the Apostle speaks, that Jesus was crucified outside the gate (Heb. 13). We can also understand it differently; that he was cast out of the vineyard, and there he was killed: so that when the gentiles received him, the vineyard would be given to others.

Or, what He says, And cast him out of the vineyard, seems to me to be this; As far as they were concerned they judged Him a stranger both to the vineyard, and the husbandmen. When therefore the Lord of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?

Then the execution is presented: "and taking him, they cast him forth out of the vineyard, and killed him," because they crucified him outside the gate of the city, and so they killed him as though a stranger to the vineyard. Isa 53:7: "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter" etc. That they cast him out of the vineyard is found in John, that whoever confessed the name of Christ was cast out of the synagogue.

(de Cons. Ev. ii. 70.) Mark does not give this as their answer, but relates that the Lord after His question put to them, made this answer to Himself. But it may be easily explained, that their words are subjoined in such a way as to show that they spoke them, without putting in 'And they answered.' Or this answer is attributed to the Lord, because, what they said being true, might well be said to have been spoken by Him who is truth.

(ubi sup.) This troubles us more, how it is that Luke not only does not relate this to have been their answer, but attributes to them a contrary answer. His words are, And when they heard it they said, God forbid. (Luke 20:16.) The only way that remains for understanding this is, therefore, that of the listening multitudes some answered as Matthew relates, and some as Luke. And let it perplex no one that Matthew says that the Chief Priests and elders of the people came to the Lord, and that he connects the whole of this discourse in one down to this parable of the vineyard, without interposing any other speaker. For it may be supposed that He spoke all these things with the Chief Priests, but that Matthew for brevity's sake omitted what Luke mentions, namely, that this parable was spoken not to those only who asked Him concerning His authority, but to the populace, among whom were some who said, He shall destroy them, and give the vineyard to others. And at the same time this saying is rightly thought to have been the Lord's, either for its truth, or for the unity of His members with their head. And there were also those who said, God forbid, those namely, who perceived that He spoke this parable against them.

(Verse 40, 41.) When therefore the Lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those farmers? They say to him: He will destroy those wicked men and will lease out his vineyard to other farmers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons. The Lord asks them not because he doesn't know what they will answer, but in order to condemn them by their own response. And a vineyard has been leased to us, and it has been leased under the condition that we render to the Lord the fruits in their seasons, and we should know at all times what we must either say or do.

The Lord asks them not as though He did not know what they would answer, but that they might be condemned by their own answer.

And Luke indeed saith, that He declared what these men should suffer; and they said, "God forbid;" and He added the testimony of Scripture. For "He beheld them, and said, What is it then that is written? The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner; and every one that falleth upon it shall be broken." But Matthew, that they themselves delivered the sentence. But this is not a contradiction. For indeed both things were done, both themselves passed the sentence against themselves; and again, when they perceived what they had said, they added, "God forbid;" and He set up the prophet against them, persuading them that certainly this would be.

Nevertheless, not even so did He plainly reveal the Gentiles, that He might afford them no handle, but signified it darkly by saying, "He will give the vineyard to others." For this purpose then did He speak by a parable, that themselves might pass the sentence, which was done in the case of David also, when He passed judgment on the parable of Nathan. But do thou mark, I pray thee, even hereby how just is the sentence, when the very persons that are to be punished condemn themselves.

"When He cometh." When? At the second coming? It seems to have this meaning, but a better meaning is this: the lord of the vineyard is God the Father Who sent His Son Who was slain by them. When He comes, that is, when He looks down on the lawlessness which the Jews committed, then He will miserably destroy them by sending the Roman army. And His vineyard, that is, His people, He will give to other husbandmen, that is, to apostles and teachers. Understand the vineyard to mean also the Divine Scriptures, in which the hedge is the letter, and the wine-press that is dug is the depth of the Spirit; the tower is theology, lofty and exalted. These Scriptures, then, were first possessed by bad husbandmen, the Pharisees; but God has let them out to us who cultivate them well. But they slew the Lord outside the vineyard, that is, outside those things of which Scripture spoke.

Then he demands their verdict: "when therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen?" So subtly does the Lord ask that they judge against themselves, as Nathan did with David when he sinned with Bathsheba.

He is become the head of the corner, because He is the union of both sides between the Law and the Gentiles.

(Verse 42.) Jesus said to them: Have you never read in the Scriptures: The stone which the builders rejected, the same has become the head of the corner? This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes. (Psalm 118:22-23). Various parables and different teachings are woven into this story. For those whom he previously called workers, vine-dressers, and farmers, he now calls builders, that is, masons. Hence the Apostle says: You are God's field, you are God's building. (1 Corinthians 3:9). So just as bricklayers and vine-growers take possession of a vineyard, they also took possession of a stone, which they either place in the foundations, next to the architect Paul (Ibid.), or in the corner, to join together two walls, that is, both peoples (Ephesians 2), who were rejected by them, became the cornerstone. And this was done by the Lord, not by human strength, but by the power of God. Peter also confidently speaks of this stone of support: This stone, which was rejected by you builders, has become the cornerstone (1 Peter 2:7). And Isaiah said: Behold, I will send a chosen, precious, corner stone into the foundations of Zion: and he that believeth in him, shall not be confounded (Isa. II, 16).

The same things are treated under various figures; whom above He called labourers and husbandmen, He now calls builders.

Then that they might learn that not only the nature of justice requires these things, but even from the beginning the grace of the Spirit had foretold them, and God had so decreed, He both added a prophecy, and reproves them in a way to put them to shame, saying, "Did ye never read, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes;" by all things showing, that they should be cast out for unbelief, and the Gentiles brought in. This He darkly intimated by the Canaanitish woman also; this again by the ass, and by the centurion, and by many other parables; this also now.

Wherefore He added too, "This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes," declaring beforehand that the believing Gentiles, and as many of the Jews as should also themselves believe, shall be one, although the difference between them had been so great before.

Then, that they might learn that nothing was opposed to God's will of the things doing, but that the event was even highly acceptable, and beyond expectation, and amazing every one of the beholders (for indeed the miracle was far beyond words), He added and said, "It is the Lord's doing." And by the stone He means Himself, and by builders the teachers of the Jews; as Ezekiel also saith, "They that build the wall, and daub it with untempered mortar." But how did they reject Him? By saying, "This man is not of God;" "This man deceiveth the people;" and again, "Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil."

That is, the stone is the gift of God to the whole building, and is wonderful in our eyes, who can discern it with the eyes of the mind.

When they seemed discontent, He brings forward Scripture testimony; as much as to say, If ye understood not My parable, at least acknowledge this Scripture.

As much as to say, How do ye not understand in what building that stone is to be set, not in yours, seeing it is rejected, but in another; but if the building is to be other, your building will be rejected.

But despite of their displeasure, the same stone furnished the head stone of the corner, for out of both nations He has joined by faith in Him as many as He would.

The stone means Christ Himself; the builders are the teachers of the Jews who rejected Him as if He were useless, saying, "Thou art a Samaritan and hast a demon." But when He rose from the dead, He was set in place as the head of the corner, that is, He became the head of the Church, joining Jews and Gentiles in one faith. For as the stone which forms the corner of a building makes continuous the walls leading to it and from it, so Christ has bound all together in one faith. This corner is marvelous, and is the Lord's doing (Ps. 117:22-23). For the Church which connects us and makes us one in faith is the Lord's doing, and is worthy of all wonder, so well is it built. And in another sense is it marvelous, because the Word of Christ has been confirmed and substantiated by marvels, that is, miracles, so that the composition of the Church is marvelous.

"Jesus saith to them." Here the confirmation is presented. And first the authority; secondly, the exposition. He says "have you never read in the Scriptures" (this is read in Ps 117:22): "the stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?" And he presents four things. First, the rejection; secondly, the dignity; thirdly, the cause; fourthly, the wonder. He says "the stone" etc. The stone is Christ, who is called a stone from many likenesses. Isa 28:16: "Behold I will lay in the foundations of Sion a cornerstone" etc. The builders are the apostles. "Let each one see how he builds." Hence that stone which they rejected, i.e., cast out, "the same is become," i.e., was established, "the head of the corner," i.e., the head of Jews and Gentiles. Hence he was made the head of the Church. But they could say: he made himself the head; therefore he says "by the Lord this has been done." Ps 117:16: "The right hand of the Lord hath wrought strength" etc. And what is this exaltation like? "And it is wonderful in our eyes;" Hab 1:5: "Behold among the nations, and see: wonder, and be astonished: for a work is done in your days, which no man will believe, when it shall be told." For so great was the dignity, that it would not have been done, had not the grace of God accomplished it. Eph 2:8: "For by grace you are saved through Christ."