3 Sunday before Elevation

(ubi sup.) This He speaks not from the Deity coeternal with the Father, but from the Humanity which He took upon Him, according to which He was made a little lower than the Angels. (Heb. 2:9.)

(Ver. 18.) And Jesus came to them and spoke, saying: All power has been given to me in heaven and on earth. The power was given to him who was recently crucified, who was buried in a tomb, who had been dead, and who later rose again. Power has been given in heaven and on earth, so that he who previously reigned in heaven may now reign on earth through the faith of believers.

"Jesus approached them and said, 'All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me.' " This authority was given to one who had just been crucified, buried in a tomb, laid dead and afterwards had arisen. Authority was given to him in both heaven and earth so that he who once reigned in heaven might also reign on earth through the faith of his believers.

Power is given to Him, Who but a little before was crucified, Who was buried, but Who afterwards rose again.

Power is given in heaven and in earth, that He who before reigned in heaven, should now reign on earth by the faith of the believers.

What then saith He unto them, when He seeth them? "All power is given unto me in heaven and on earth." Again He speaketh to them more after the manner of man, for they had not yet received the spirit, which was able to raise them on high.

(Serm. 80.) The Son of God conveyed to the Son of the Virgin, the God to the Man, the Deity to the Flesh, that which He had ever together with the Father.

The disciples then, when they saw Him, knew the Lord; and worshipped Him, bowing their faces to the ground. And He their affectionate and merciful Master, that He might take away all doubtfulness from their hearts, coming to them, strengthened them in their belief; as it follows, And Jesus came and spake to them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

What the Psalmist says of the Lord at His rising again, Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands (Ps. 8:6.), this the Lord now says of Himself, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. And here it is to be noted, that even before His resurrection the Angels knew that they were subjected to the man Christ. Christ then desiring that it should be also known to men that all power was committed to Him in heaven and in earth, sent preachers to make known the word of life to all nations; whence it follows, Go ye therefore, and teach all nations.

In which lowering of His condition He received from the Father a dispensation in those very respects which you blame as human; from the very beginning learning, even then, (that state of a) man which He was destined in the end to become. It is He who descends, He who interrogates, He who demands, He who swears.

Jesus said to them, "All authority has been given unto Me in heaven and on earth." This means, "As God and Creator I have always had authority over all things." "For all things are Thy servants," as David says to God (Ps. 118:91). "But I did not yet have man's voluntary submission. Now I shall have this as well. For all things shall be subjected unto Me, since by means of the cross I have conquered him who had the power of death." Submission is of two kinds: the one is involuntary, inasmuch as we are all the servants of God even unwillingly, as are the demons themselves. The other is voluntary, as seen in Paul who voluntarily became a servant of Christ. Formerly it was as if the Saviour had authority over all things in half measure only, that is, He received only the involuntary submission of all. But after the cross, when the knowledge of God has been divulged to all, and all who submitted to Him did so freely of their own will, Christ rightly says, "Now have I received all authority. Previously My authority was in part, as they served Me only involuntarily in that I was their Creator. But now that men serve Me with knowledge as well, total and complete authority has been given unto Me." By whom was it given to Him? By Himself alone and by His own humility. For if He had not humbled Himself and engaged the adversary by means of the cross, He would not have saved us. So the words "Authority has been given unto Me" you must understand as follows: "By My own struggles and fierce contests I have saved mankind who have become My lot and a special people." The Lord, therefore, has authority on earth because all the earth has acknowledged Him; and He has authority in heaven because the reward of those who believe in Him, as well as the place where they shall live, is in the heavens. In yet another sense does He have authority in heaven: since human nature which formerly had been condemned is now fundamentally joined to God the Word, human nature itself sits in heaven and is worshipped by the angels. He rightly says that "All authority has been given unto Me in heaven," for human nature which had formerly been servile, now in Christ rules over all things. Considering both interpretations, then, you may understand Christ's words "All authority has been given unto Me" as follows: taking the words to have been spoken by God the Word, "All authority has been given unto Me in that those who formerly served Me with involuntary submission now also voluntarily acknowledge Me as God." But taking the words to have been spoken by human nature, understand them thus: "I, the human nature that was formerly condemned, am now God because of the unconfused union with the Son of God, and therefore I have received authority over all things, so that I am worshipped by the angels in heaven, and glorified in all the ends of the earth."

And Jesus coming, spoke to them. Here the instruction given by Christ is set forth. And three things are to be considered. First he announces his power; second, he enjoins the office; third, he promises future assistance. The second is at going therefore, teach all nations; the third is at behold I am with you all days. He says therefore and Jesus coming, spoke to them. The disciples were divided, because some held him in reverence, while others doubted; therefore they needed both, namely that he should manifest himself and that he should strengthen them. So he came to the whole people; Isa. 9:2: the people of the Gentiles, that walked in darkness, have seen a great light. Likewise he announced his power: all power is given to me in heaven and in earth. And, as Jerome says, power was given to him who had previously been crucified by the people. The power of God is nothing other than omnipotence; and this was not given to Christ, because it does not befit Christ according to his humanity. But something befits him both according as he is man and according as he is God: hence in Christ, according as he is man, there is knowledge, will, and free choice, and likewise according as he is God. Therefore in Christ there is a twofold will, namely created and uncreated. Hence it can be argued that there is a twofold power, and a twofold knowledge, etc. The question is therefore, why, just as all knowledge is communicated to him, is not omnipotence also? The reason is this. Knowledge and cognition proceed according to an assimilation of the knower to the thing known, because it suffices that the species of the things known be in the knower in some manner, either so that he knows through his essence, or so that they are infused, or so that they are received from things: however they may be, they suffice for knowledge; therefore it is not necessary that the essence be the essence of all things, but that it be capable of receiving all things. But this is to be of infinite receptivity, like prime matter. Active power, however, follows upon act, because to the extent that something is in act, to that extent it has the power to act; therefore whoever has active omnipotence has the power for the act of all things. But this can only be because he has infinite power, which does not befit Christ insofar as he is man, but only insofar as he is God. What then does it mean that all power is given to me in heaven and in earth? It should be noted, according to Hilary, that the giving can be understood either with respect to the divinity, because the Father from eternity communicated his essence to the Son; and because his essence is his power, therefore from eternity he gave his power; or it can also be referred to Christ according to his humanity. But it must be understood that the humanity of Christ received something by the grace of the union, and these are all the things that are proper to God; but it received something consequent upon the union, such as the fullness of grace and things of this kind, which is as it were the effect of the union; John 1:14: we saw him as the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. In all those things, therefore, that are in Christ by the grace of the union, it is not necessary that all things be spoken of according to a duality, but in the other things that are consequent upon it. Hence I say that the power was given, not because another power was given, but it was given insofar as it is united to the Word, as belonging to the Son of God by nature, but to Christ by the grace of the union. But why does he say after the resurrection, all power is given to me, rather than before the resurrection? It must be said that in Scripture something is said to come about when it first becomes known: so therefore before the resurrection his omnipotence was not so manifested, although he possessed it; but then it was most fully manifested, when he was able to convert the whole world. We can also say otherwise, that power signifies a certain honor of authority, as when we speak of men in positions of power; and so power is understood here. Now it is certain that Christ, who from eternity had the kingdom of the world as the Son of God, received the exercise of it from the resurrection; as if to say: now I am in possession. Concerning this it is found in Dan. 7:26: judgment shall sit, that his power may be taken away, and be broken in pieces, and perish even to the end. And that the kingdom, and power, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven may be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all kings shall serve him, and shall obey him. Hence a certain actual authority is understood: as if a son were raised to the exercise of the power which he had by nature; Apoc. 5:12: the Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive power and divinity.

('Beda; in Hom.' non occ.) He who before His Passion had said, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, (Matt. 10:5.) now, when rising from the dead, says, Go and teach all nations. Hereby let the Jews be put to silence, who say that Christ's coming is to be for their salvation only. Let the Donatists also blush, who, desiring to confine Christ to one place, have said that He is in Africa only, and not in other countries.

In order for someone to be baptized truly and fully, there is required the expression of the vocal form instituted by the Lord, which is this: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen: without omission of any word and without insertion of any word, without transposition of the aforesaid order and without alteration of the prescribed name.

Since the power that restores us is the power of the whole Trinity, which holy mother Church believes in the mind, confesses in word, and professes in sign, under the distinction and property, order and natural origin of the three persons: hence it is that for the expression of these things in the Sacrament which is the first of all Sacraments, and in which this power operates firstly and principally, there ought to be an expression of the Trinity in a distinct, proper, and ordered naming, as regards the common form, although in the time of the primitive Church it could be done in the name of Christ, in which the understanding of the Trinity is enclosed.

There is generation as of a son by his father, and here are present all the aforesaid conditions except one, that of light, which is coeternal duration, and which is to be supposed in the generation of the Son of God. And the name eternal generation is applied to this final instance, the generation of the Son by the Father. And Christ confirmed this very point when He said: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." He did not say, "In the name of light and brightness." These, then, are the eleven stars worshiping Joseph, the most comely son, that is, the eleven noble conditions mentioned above; but the twelfth, eternal coexistence, is found in the Son of God.

The first mode first and principally fixes its gaze upon being itself, saying that He Who Is is the primary name of God. The second mode fixes its gaze upon the good itself, saying that this is the primary name of God. The first pertains especially to the Old Testament, which above all proclaims the unity of the divine essence; whence it was said to Moses: I am who I am; the second pertains to the New, which determines the plurality of persons, baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Therefore our master Christ, wishing to raise the young man who had kept the Law to evangelical perfection, principally and precisely attributed the name of goodness to God. No one, he said, is good but God alone. Damascene therefore, following Moses, says that He Who Is is the primary name of God; Dionysius, following Christ, says that the good is the primary name of God.

In the New Testament testimony is given, but explicitly, both in Sacraments and in express teachings. For the first of the Sacraments, which is baptism, according to what is written in the last chapter of Matthew, must be performed in the express invocation of the divine Trinity. For there it is said: Teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: on account of which in that foundational Sacrament the character of the Trinity is imprinted.

You know that in space you can move in three ways—to left or right, backwards or forwards, up or down. Every direction is either one of these three or a compromise between them. They are called the three Dimensions. Now notice this. If you are using only one dimension, you could draw only a straight line. If you are using two, you could draw a figure: say, a square. And a square is made up of four straight lines. Now a step further. If you have three dimensions, you can then build what we call a solid body: say, a cube—a thing like a dice or a lump of sugar. And a cube is made up of six squares.

Do you see the point? A world of one dimension would be a straight line. In a two-dimensional world, you still get straight lines, but many lines make one figure. In a three-dimensional world, you still get figures but many figures make one solid body. In other words, as you advance to more real and more complicated levels, you do not leave behind you the things you found on the simpler levels: you still have them, but combined in new ways—in ways you could not imagine if you knew only the simpler levels.

Now the Christian account of God involves just the same principle. The human level is a simple and rather empty level. On the human level one person is one being, and any two persons are two separate beings—just as, in two dimensions (say on a flat sheet of paper) one square is one figure, and any two squares are two separate figures. On the Divine level you still find personalities; but up there you find them combined in new ways which we, who do not live on that level, cannot imagine. In God's dimension, so to speak, you find a being who is three Persons while remaining one Being, just as a cube is six squares while remaining one cube. Of course we cannot fully conceive a Being like that: just as, if we were so made that we perceived only two dimensions in space we could never properly imagine a cube. But we can get a sort of faint notion of it. And when we do, we are then, for the first time in our lives, getting some positive idea, however faint, of something super-personal—something more than a person. It is something we could never have guessed, and yet, once we have been told, one almost feels one ought to have been able to guess it because it fits in so well with all the things we know already.

Go ye, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, speaking indeed of one name, but distinguishing them into three Persons.

Palladius said, 'The soul which is being trained according to the will of Christ should either be earnest in learning what it does not know, or should publicly teach what it does know. If it wants to do neither, though it could, it is mad. The first step on the road away from God is contempt for teaching, that is, not to want to give food to the soul that truly wants it.'

And concerning baptism, thus baptize ye: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if thou have not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou canst not in cold, in warm. But if thou have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but thou shalt order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

(de Trin. ii. 1 &c.) For what part of the salvation of men is there that is not contained in this Sacrament? All things are full and perfect, as proceeding from Him who is full and perfect. The nature of His relation is expressed in the title Father; but He is nothing but Father; for not after the manner of men does He derive from somewhat else that He is Father, being Himself Unbegotten, Eternal, and having the source of His being in Himself, known to none, save the Son. The Son is the Offspring of the Unbegotten, One of the One, True of the True, Living of the Living, Perfect of the Perfect, Strength of Strength, Wisdom of Wisdom, Glory of Glory; the Image of the Unseen God, the Form of the Unbegotten Father. Neither can the Holy Spirit be separated from the confession of the Father and the Son. And this consolation of our longing desires is absent from no place. He is the pledge of our hope in the effects of His gifts, He is the light of our minds, He shines in our souls. These things as the heretics cannot change, they introduce into them their human explanations. As Sabellius who identifies the Father with the Son, thinking the distinction to be made rather in name than in person, and setting forth one and the same Person as both Father and Son. As Ebion, who deriving the beginning of His existence from Mary, makes Him not Man of God, but God of man. As the Arians, who derive the form, the power, and the wisdom of God out of nothing, and in time. What wonder then that men should have diverse opinions about the Holy Spirit, who thus rashly after their own pleasure create and change the Son, by whom that Spirit is bestowed?

(Verse 19.) Therefore, go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. First they teach all nations, then they immerse the instructed ones in water. For it cannot be that the body receives the sacrament of baptism unless the soul has first embraced the truth with faith. But they are baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, so that there may be one divinity among them, one bestowal: and the name of the Trinity is one God.

" 'Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.' " First they teach all nations; then they baptize those they have taught with water, for the body is not able to receive the sacrament of baptism before the soul has received the truth of the faith. They were baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit so that the three who are one in divinity might also be one in giving themselves. The name of the Trinity is the name of the one God.

They first then teach all nations, and when taught dip them in water. For it may not be that the body receive the sacrament of Baptism, unless the soul first receive the truth of the Faith. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, that they whose Godhead is one should be conferred at once, to name this Trinity, being to name One God.

(Didymi Lib. ii. de Spir. Sanct.) And though some one there may be of so averse a spirit as to undertake to baptize in such sort as to omit one of these names, therein contradicting Christ Who ordained this for a law, his baptism will effect nothing; those who are baptized by him will not be at all delivered from their sins. From these words we gather how undivided is the substance of the Trinity, that the Father is verily the Father of the Son, and the Son verily the Son of the Father, and the Holy Spirit the Spirit of both the Father and the Son, and also the Spirit of wisdom and of truth, that is, of the Son of God. This then is the salvation of them that believe, and in this Trinity is wrought the perfect communication of ecclesiastical discipline.

"Go ye, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you;" giving the one charge with a view to doctrine, the other concerning commandments. And of the Jews He makes no mention, neither brings forward what had been done, nor upbraids Peter with his denial, nor any one of the others with their flight, but having put into their hands a summary of the doctrine, that expressed by the form of baptism, commands them to pour forth over the whole world.

(Serm. 80.) Thus all nations are created a second time to salvation by that one and the same Power, which created them to being.

The Passover affords a more than usually solemn day for baptism; when, withal, the Lord's passion, in which we are baptized, was completed. Nor will it be incongruous to interpret figuratively the fact that, when the Lord was about to celebrate the last Passover, He said to the disciples who were sent to make preparation, "You will meet a man bearing water." He points out the place for celebrating the Passover by the sign of water. After that, Pentecost is a most joyous space for conferring baptisms; wherein, too, the resurrection of the Lord was repeatedly proved among the disciples [Acts 1:3], and the hope of the advent of the Lord indirectly pointed to, in that, at that time, when He had been received back into the heavens [Acts 1:9], the angels told the apostles that "He would so come, as He had withal ascended into the heavens;" [Acts 1:11] at Pentecost, of course. But, moreover, when Jeremiah says, "And I will gather them together from the extremities of the land in the feast-day," he signifies the day of the Passover and of Pentecost, which is properly a "feast-day." However, every day is the Lord's; every hour, every time, is apt for baptism: if there is a difference in the solemnity, distinction there is none in the grace.

Again, in the Pslams, David says: "Bring to God, ye countries of the nations"-undoubtedly because "unto every land" the preaching of the apostles had to "go out" -"bring to God fame and honour; bring to God the sacrifices of His name: take up victims and enter into His courts.

It is only at the last that He instructs them to "go and teach all nations, and baptize them," when they were so soon to receive "the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, who should guide them into all the truth.

Accordingly, after one of these had been struck off, He commanded the eleven others, on His departure to the Father, to "go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost." Immediately, therefore, so did the apostles, whom this designation indicates as "the sent.

Even to the last He taught us (the same truth of His mission), when He sent forth His apostles to preach His gospel "among all nations; " for He thus fulfilled the psalm: "Their sound is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.

For the law of baptizing has been imposed, and the formula prescribed: "Go," He saith, "teach the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." The comparison with this law of that definition, "Unless a man have been reborn of water and Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of the heavens," has tied faith to the necessity of baptism.

He no longer sends His disciples to the Jews alone, but since He has received authority over all, and has sanctified all human nature in Himself, it is right that He sends them to all the nations, commanding the disciples to baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Let Arius then be put to shame because Christ did not say to baptize "in the names," but "in the name," for the name of the Three is one, the Godhead, and the Three are one God. And let Sabellius be put to shame because the Lord spoke of Three Persons, and not, as that man prattles, of one person having three names, at times called the Father, at times, the Son, and at times, the Holy Spirit. But the Three Persons have one Name, which is God.

Going therefore, teach all nations. Here he enjoins the office; and he enjoins a threefold office. First, of teaching; second, of baptizing; third, the office of instructing as regards morals. He says therefore going therefore, teach all nations. And this follows logically; as if to say: all power has been given to me by God, so that not only the Jews but also the Gentiles may be converted to me; therefore, because the time has come, going, teach all nations. John 20:21: as the Father hath sent me, I also send you. And Luke 22:29: I dispose to you, as my Father hath disposed to me, a kingdom. And he says going therefore, teach; because this is the first thing in which one must be instructed, namely in faith, because without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11:6. And from this it became established in the Church that one first catechizes those to be baptized, i.e., instructs them in the faith. And, having received the power, he sends them to all nations; and this is what he says, teach all nations. Isa. 49:6: I have given thee to be the light of the Gentiles, that thou mayst be my salvation even to the farthest part of the earth. And after they have been taught the faith, he gives the office of baptizing. Baptizing them, etc.; as if to say: he who is promoted to a dignity must first be informed of the dignity, so that reverence may be had for him afterwards. Gal. 3:27: as many of you as have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ. But what is the form of Baptism? In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. In Christ there are two things, humanity and divinity. The humanity is the way, not the end; John 14:6: I am the way, the truth, and the life: the truth, as the end of the contemplative life; the life, as the end of the active life. I do not will that you remain in the way, namely in the humanity, but that you pass beyond to the divinity. Therefore it was necessary that two things be signified, the humanity and the divinity. Through Baptism, the humanity; Rom. 6:4: for we are buried together with him by Baptism into death. And through the form of the words, the divinity, so that sanctification is through the divinity. And therefore he says in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. And the reason is that through Baptism regeneration takes place, and in regeneration three things are required. First, to whom it is made; second, through whom; third, by what means. To whom, namely to God the Father, as the Apostle says in Rom. 8:29: whom he foreknew, he also predestinated to be made conformable to the image of his Son. And John 1:12: he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name. Through whom, because through the Son; Gal. 4:4: God sent his Son (...) that we might receive the adoption of sons, because through adoption we are sons in relation to the natural Son. Likewise, by what means, because we have received the gift of the Holy Spirit; Rom. 8:15: you have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear, but you have received the spirit of adoption of sons of God. Therefore it was necessary to make mention of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And these were present in Christ's Baptism, because there was the Son through whom, the Father from whom, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. And he says in the name, i.e., in the invocation of the name, or in the power of the name, because it has power; Jer. 14:9: thou, O Lord, art among us, and thy name is called upon us; forsake us not. Likewise he says in the name, not 'in the names,' and the heresies are confounded which do not posit a distinction in that he says in the name of the Father and of the Son. But Arius is confounded by the fact that he says in the singular, in the name. It should be noted that in the primitive Church baptism was administered in the name of Christ, and this was so that the name might be made venerable. But would it suffice now? I believe not, because the explicit invocation of the Trinity is required. In Christ the Trinity is implicitly contained. So therefore he leads them to be instructed for Baptism. But against this, the Apostle says that God sent him not to baptize, but to evangelize; but to baptize through others, just as Christ did not baptize, but his disciples.

('Beda in Hom.' non occ.) It is made a question how He says here, I am with you, John 16:5. when we read elsewhere that He said, I go unto him that sent me. What is said of His human nature is distinct from what is said of His divine nature. He is going to His Father in His human nature, He abides with His disciples in that form in which He is equal with the Father. When He says, to the end of the world, He expresses the infinite by the finite; for He who remains in this present world with His elect, protecting them, the same will continue with them after the end, rewarding them.

Because it accords with the time of grace that the Sacrament of communion and love should not merely signify communion and love, but also inflame unto the same; and because that which most inflames us to mutual love and most unites the members is the unity of the Head, from whom through the diffusive, unitive, and transformative power of love mutual love flows into us: hence it is that in this Sacrament of the Eucharist is contained the true body of Christ and immaculate flesh, as diffusing itself to us and uniting us to one another and transforming us into itself through the most ardent charity, by which he gave himself to us and offered himself for us and restored himself to us and remains with us even unto the end of the world.

"These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you." When would He not abide with them, who, about to ascend to heaven, promises, saying: "Behold, I am with you all days even to the consummation of the world"? But the incarnate Word both abides and departs: He departs in body, He abides in divinity. He declares therefore that He then abided with them, because He who was always present by invisible power was already departing from corporeal sight.

(Verse 20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. The main order: He commanded the apostles to first teach all nations, then to immerse them in the sacrament of faith, and after faith and baptism, to command what should be observed. And lest we think that what has been commanded is light and few, he added: All things whatsoever I have commanded you. So that whoever believes, who has been baptized in the Trinity, may do all the things that are commanded.

And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age. He who promises to be with his disciples until the end of the age, and shows them that they will always be victorious, and that he will never leave those who believe in him. But he who promises his presence until the end of the world, does not ignore the day when he knows he will be with the apostles.

" 'Teach them to observe all that I have commanded you.' " What a marvelous sequence this is. He commanded the apostles first to teach all nations and then to baptize them in the sacrament of faith and then, after faith and baptism, to teach them to observe all that he had commanded. Lest we think these commandments of little consequence or few in number, he added "all that I have commanded you," so that those who were to believe and be baptized in the Trinity would observe everything they had been taught.

Observe the order of these injunctions. He bids the Apostles first to teach all nations, then to wash them with the sacrament of faith, and after faith and baptism then to teach them what things they ought to observe; Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

He then who promises that He will be with His disciples to the end of the world, shows both that they shall live for ever, and that He will never depart from those that believe.

And with regard to our having Him really always with us, He saith, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." From all which it is evident, that for no other object was this said, but that the rebuke of the disciples might not wither the faith of the woman, just then budding.

After that, because he had enjoined on them great things, to raise their courage, He says, "Lo! I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." Seest thou His own proper power again? Seest thou how those other things also were spoken for condescension? And not with those men only did He promise to be, but also with all that believe after them. For plainly the apostles were not to remain here unto "the end of the world;" but he speaks to the believers as to one body. For tell me not, saith He, of the difficulty of the things: for "I am with you," who make all things easy. This He said to the prophets also in the Old Testament continually, as well to Jeremiah objecting his youth, as to Moses and Ezekiel shrinking from the office, "I am with you," this here also to these men. And mark, I pray thee, the excellence of these, for the others, when sent to one nation, often excused themselves, but these said nothing of the sort, though sent to the world. And He reminds them also of the consummation, that He may draw them on more, and that they may look not at the present dangers only, but also at the good things to come that are without end.

"For the irksome things, saith He, that ye will undergo are finished together with the present life, since at least even this world itself shall come to an end, but the good things which ye shall enjoy remain immortal, as I have often told you before." Thus having invigorated and roused their minds, by the remembrance of that day, He sent them forth. For that day to them that live in good works is to be desired, even as on the other hand to those in sin, it is terrible as to the condemned.

(Serm. 72. 3.) For by ascending into heaven He does not desert His adopted; but from above strengthens to endurance, those whom He invites upwards to glory. Of which glory may Christ make us partakers, Who is the King of glory, God blessed for ever, AMEN.

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. (James 2:26.)

Hence we understand that to the end of the world shall not be wanting those who shall be worthy of the Divine indwelling.

Because it is not sufficient only to be baptized, but one must also labor to do good after his baptism, Christ then says, "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; not just two or three, but all My commandments." Let us tremble then, brethren, when we realize that if even one thing is lacking in us, we are not perfect servants of Christ, for we are required to keep all the commandments. See that the Lord's words contain those two essentials of Christianity: theology and active virtue. For by saying that it is necessary to baptize in the name of the Trinity, He handed down to us theology. And by saying that it is also necessary to teach the keeping of the commandments, He guides us in the way of active virtue. Since He is sending them out among the Gentiles to face death and danger, He gives them courage by saying, "Fear not, for I will be with you until the end of the age." See also how He mentioned the end so as to arouse in them disdain for these calamities. Do not be downcast, He says, for all things will have an end, both worldly sorrows and worldly joys. Do not be oppressed by sorrows for they will pass, and do not be deceived by good things, for they, too, will come to an end. His promise to be with them was not made only to the apostles, but to all His disciples. For of course the apostles would not live unto the end. He makes this promise even to us, and to those after us, not that He would be with us until the end, and then after the end He would depart from us - far from it! For it is rather from that moment on that He will be with us ever more clearly and distinctly. For the word "until," wherever it occurs in Scripture, does not exclude the things that come after. Giving thanks, therefore, to the Lord Who is with us here, and provides us with every good thing, and again will be with us more perfectly after the end, here let us end the explanation. For to Him is due all thanksgiving, glory, and honor unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. But does it suffice for salvation to believe and to be baptized? No; rather, instruction in morals is also required; therefore he says teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. Ps. 118:4: thou hast commanded thy commandments to be kept most diligently. And he says whatsoever I have commanded, not 'what I have counseled.' Hence above, 10:27: what I say to you, I say to all. Then he sets forth the third point: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. Here he promises assistance; and it answers those who say: you command us to teach all men, but we are not sufficient. Do not fear, because I am with you. And note that just as the commandment is set forth as passing to all, so also the assistance; because he promises it to the apostles and to others carrying out a similar task. Hence he himself, praying to the Father, says: and not for them only do I pray, namely the disciples, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me. Hence he promises to all in common; John 14:12: he that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do, and greater than these shall he do. Likewise, for all time; hence he says all days, even to the consummation of the world. He does not say this as though after that he would not be with us, except until the consummation of the world, but because then we will be in consummation in glory; Apoc. 21:3: behold the tabernacle of God with men, and he will dwell with them. And they shall be his people, and God himself with them shall be their God. Hence also in Isa. 7:14 it is said that his name shall be called Emmanuel, which is interpreted 'God with us,' even to the consummation of the world; as if to say: the generation of the faithful is stronger than the world. For the world will not perish until all things are accomplished, i.e., until the Church of the faithful is consummated and the number of the elect is completed by God, unto life everlasting, to whom is honor and power through infinite ages of ages. Amen.

Possessing both natures, that is, the human and the divine, [Christ] endured the passion in his humanity, in order that without distinction he who suffered should be called both Lord of glory and Son of man, even as it is written: "Who descended from heaven."

Some people, certainly, find very surprising what the Lord said in the Gospel, "Nobody has ascended into heaven, except the one who came down from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven." How, they ask, can the Son of man be said to have come down from heaven, when it was here that he was taken on in the Virgin's womb? People who say this are not to be rejected but instructed. I think, you see, that they are raising this question out of piety but are not yet able to understand what they are inquiring about. They do not realize, I mean, that the divinity took on the humanity in such a way as to become one person, God and man; and that the humanity was attached to the divinity in such a way that Word, soul and flesh were the one Christ. And that is why it could be said, "No one has ascended into heaven, except the one who came down from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven."

As a human being he was on earth, not in heaven where he now is … although in his nature as Son of God he was in heaven, but as Son of man he was still on earth and had not yet ascended into heaven. In a similar way, although in his nature as Son of God he is the Lord of glory, in his nature as Son of man he was crucified.

Spiritual birth happens when human beings, being earthly, become heavenly. And this can only happen when they are made members of me. So that he may ascend who descended, since no one ascends who did not descend. Therefore everyone who needs to be changed and raised must meet together in a union with Christ so that the Christ who descended may ascend, considering his body (that is to say, his church) as nothing other than himself.

"And no man hath ascended into heaven, but He that came down from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven." Behold, He was here, and was also in heaven; was here in His flesh, in heaven by His divinity; yea, everywhere by His divinity. Born of a mother, not quitting the Father. Two nativities of Christ are understood: one divine, the other human: one, that by which we were to be made; the other, that by which we were to be made anew: both marvellous; that without mother, this without father. But because He had taken a body of Adam, for Mary was of Adam, and was about to raise that same body again, it was an earthly thing He had said in saying, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." But this was a heavenly thing, when He said, "Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he shall not see the kingdom of God." Come then, brethren! God has willed to be the Son of man; and willed men to be sons of God. He came down for our sakes; let us ascend for His sake. For He alone descended and ascended, He who saith, "No man hath ascended into heaven, but He who came down from heaven." Are they not therefore to ascend into heaven whom He makes sons of God? Certainly they are: this is the promise to us, "They shall be equal to the angels of God." Then how is it that no man ascends, but He that descended? Because one only descended, only one ascends. What of the rest? What are we to understand, but that they shall be His members, that one may ascend? Therefore it follows that "no man hath ascended into heaven, but He who came down from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven." Dost thou marvel that He was both here and in heaven? Such He made His disciples. Hear the Apostle Paul saying, "But our conversation is in heaven." If the Apostle Paul, a man, walked in the flesh on earth, and yet had his conversation in heaven, was the God of heaven and earth not able to be both in heaven and on earth?

Therefore, if none but He descended and ascended, what hope is there for the rest? The hope for the rest is this, that He came down in order that in Him and with Him they might be one, who should ascend through Him. "He saith not, And to seeds," saith the apostle, "as in many; but as in one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." And to believers he saith, "And ye are Christ's; and if Christ's, then are Abraham's seed." What he said to be one, that he said that we all are. Hence, in the Psalms, many sometimes sing, to show that one is made of many; sometimes one sings, to show what is made of many. Therefore was it only one that was healed in the pool; and whoever else went down into it was not healed. Now this one shows forth the oneness of the Church. Woe to them who hate unity, and make to themselves parties among men! Let them hear him who wished to make them one, in one, for one: let them hear him who says, Be not ye making many: "I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. But neither he that planteth is anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase." They were saying, "I am of Paul, I of Apollos, I of Cephas." And he says, "Is Christ divided?" Be ye in one, be one thing, be one person: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but He who came down from heaven." Lo! we wish to be thine, they said to Paul. And he said to them, I will not that ye be Paul's, but be ye His whose is Paul together with you.

(De Pecc. mer. et remiss. c. xxxi) After taking notice of this lack of knowledge in a person, who, on the strength of his magisterial station, set himself above others, and blaming the unbelief of such men, our Lord says, that if such as these do not believe, others will: No one hath ascended into heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man who is in heaven. This may be rendered: The spiritual birth shall be of such sort, as that men from being earthly shall become heavenly: which will not be possible, except they are made members of Me; so that he who ascends, becomes one with Him who descended. Our Lord accounts His body, i. e. His Church, as Himself.

(ut sup.) Although He was made the Son of man upon earth, yet His Divinity with which, remaining in heaven, He descended to earth, He hath declared not to disagree with the title of Son of man, as He hath thought His flesh worthy the name of Son of God. For through the Unity of person, by which both substances are one Christ, He walked upon earth, being Son of God; and remained in heaven, being Son of man. And the belief of the greater, involves belief in the less. If then the Divine substance, which is so far more removed from us, and could for our sake take up the substance of man so as to unite them in one person; how much more easily may we believe, that the Saints united with the man Christ, become with Him one Christ; so that while it is true of all, that they ascend by grace, it is at the same time true, that He alone ascends to heaven, Who came down from heaven.

(Tr. xii. c. 8) But thou wonderest that He was at once here, and in heaven. Yet such power hath He given to His disciples. Hear Paul, Our conversation is in heaven. (Phil. 3:20) If the man Paul walked upon earth, and had his conversation in heaven; shall not the God of heaven and earth be able to be in heaven and earth?

If a man of set purpose descend naked to the valley, and there providing himself with clothes and armour, ascend the mountain again, he who ascended may be said to be the same with him who descended.

In the descending way, there is consummation in humility and beginning in love, while the opposite is true of the ascending way. Hence, in descending, we begin with the liveliness of desire and go to the humility of service. Wherefore Christ came to the humility of serving us. Wherefore also as the soul has Angels going up, so must it have them going down. Hence: "No one has ascended into heaven except Him who has descended from heaven."

The principle saving us is He who alone can enter heaven by Himself, and all others through Him; and this is Christ the Lord. Therefore He says: "And no one has ascended into heaven," that is, no one has the power of ascending thither; "except He who descended from heaven," through the assumption of humanity: "the Son of Man, who is in heaven," through the presence and immensity of the Divinity: therefore everyone who ascends and is saved, ascends through Him. Concerning this power of ascending and descending, Ephesians 4: "He who descended is the same one who also ascended above all the heavens, that He might fill all things." Concerning His existence in heaven, in chapter 1: "The Only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him." He it is who makes one ascend from death to life: in chapter 8: "If the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed."

But a question arises concerning what He says: "No one ascends into heaven except He who descended from heaven." Against this: All the saints ascend, and yet none of them descended. Likewise, the body of Christ ascended into heaven, and yet did not descend from heaven. Likewise it is objected: if this is understood of Christ, it is understood either according to the divine nature or the human. Not according to the human, because that nature did not descend from heaven, and moreover at that time, when he was speaking, it was not in heaven. It cannot be according to the divine, because it did not ascend, since it could not become greater nor did it change place.

Some respond that the exception here comprehends not only Christ, who is the head, but rather the whole body of Christ; and all those and only those who belong to his body ascend.

But this cannot stand, because the body did not descend from heaven. Therefore it must be understood that "to ascend" is here said by one's own power, not power given from elsewhere, and thus only Christ was able to do so.

To what is objected concerning the body, Augustine responds that it is no obstacle, because the body is like a garment; whence if someone descended naked from a mountain and ascended clothed, we say: no one ascended except he who descended; so also in the matter at hand.

To what is asked — according to which nature is this said? — I respond: It must be said that in that statement three things are said of one hypostasis: "to ascend" belongs to him by reason of the human nature; "to descend," by reason of the divine in relation to the human, because he humbled himself by assuming flesh; but "to be in heaven," as at that time, according to the divine nature purely. And thus the whole cannot be referred back to one nature, but to one hypostasis.

And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven —thus very clearly showing that no one at all had ascended into the upper place except the Lord Christ Himself.

For no man hath ascended up to heaven but He That came down from heaven the Son of man. For since the Word of God came down from heaven, He says that the son of man came down, refusing after the Incarnation to be divided into two persons, and not suffering certain to say that the Temple taken by reason of need of the Virgin is one Son, the Word again which appeared from God the Father another: save only as regards the distinction which belongs to each by nature. For as He is the Word of God, so Man too of a woman, but One Christ of both, Undivided in regard of Sonship and God-befitting Glory. For how does He clothe as its own the Temple of the Virgin, with what befitteth the bare Word Alone: and again appropriateth to Himself what befitteth the Flesh only? For now He saith that the Son of man hath come down from heaven: but at the time of His Passion, He feareth, and is sore afraid, and very heavy, and is recorded as Himself suffering the Sufferings which befitted His Human Nature only.

(xxvii. Mor. c. 8. al. 11.) For as much as we are made one with Him, to the place from which He came alone in Himself, thither He returns alone in us; and He who is ever in heaven, daily ascendeth to heaven.

"Descended from heaven" refers to his origin from the Spirit. For though Mary contributed to his growth in the womb and birth all that is natural to her sex, his body did not owe to her its origin. The "Son of man" refers to the birth of the flesh conceived in the Virgin; "who is in heaven" implies the power of his eternal nature—an infinite nature, which could not restrict itself to the limits of the body—of which it was itself the source and base. By the virtue of the Spirit and the power of God the Word, though he sojourned in the form of a servant, he was ever present as Lord of all within and beyond the circle of heaven and earth. So he descended from heaven and is the Son of man, yet is in heaven. For the Word made flesh did not cease to be the Word. As the Word, he is in heaven, as flesh he is the Son of man. As Word made flesh, he is at once from heaven, and Son of man and in heaven. For the power of the Word, abiding eternally without body, was present still in the heaven he had left. The flesh owed its origin to him and to no one else. So the Word made flesh, though he was flesh, nonetheless never ceased to be the Word.

It is not possible by the laws of bodies for the same object to remain and to descend. The one is the change of downward motion, the other the stillness of being at rest. The infant wails but is in heaven: the boy grows but remains ever the immeasurable God. By what perception of human understanding can we comprehend that he ascended where he was before, and he descended who remained in heaven? The Lord says, "What if you should behold the Son of man ascending to where he was before?" The Son of man ascends where he was before. Can sense apprehend this? The Son of man—who is in heaven—descends from heaven. Can reason cope with this? The Word was made flesh—can words express this? The Word becomes flesh, that is, God becomes man. The man is in heaven: the God is from heaven. He ascends who descended, but he descends and yet does not descend. He is as he ever was, yet he was not ever what he is. We pass in review of the causes, but we cannot explain the manner. We perceive the manner but cannot understand the causes. Yet, if we understand Christ Jesus even in this way, we shall know him. If we seek to understand him further, we shall not know him at all.

(de Trin. c. 16.) Or, His descending from heaven is the source of His origin as conceived by the Spirit: Mary gave not His body its origin, though the natural qualities of her sex contributed its birth and increase. That He is the Son of man is from the birth of the flesh which was conceived in the Virgin. That He is in heaven is from the power of His everlasting nature, which did not contract the power of the Word of God, which is infinite, within the sphere of a finite body. Our Lord remaining in the form of a servant, far from the whole circle, inner and outer, of heaven and the world, yet as Lord of heaven and the world, was not absent therefrom. So then He came down from heaven because He was the Son of man; and He was in heaven, because the Word, which was made flesh, had not ceased to be the Word.

If, again, he allege His own word when He said, "I and the Father are one," let him attend to the fact, and understand that He did not say, "I and the Father am one, but are one." For the word are is not said of one person, but it refers to two persons, and one power. He has Himself made this clear, when He spake to His Father concerning the disciples, "The glory which Thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; that the world may know that Thou hast sent me." What have the Noetians to say to these things? Are alI one body in respect of substance, or is it that we become one in the power and disposition of unity of mind? In the same manner the Son, who was sent and was not known of those who are in the world, confessed that He was in the Father in power and disposition. For the Son is the one mind of the Father. We who have the Father's mind believe so (in Him); but they who have it not have denied the Son. And if, again, they choose to allege the fact that Philip inquired about the Father, saying, "Show us the Father, and it sufficeth us," to whom the Lord made answer in these terms: "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father. Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? " and if they choose to maintain that their dogma is ratified by this passage, as if He owned Himself to be the Father, let them know that it is decidedly against them, and that they are confuted by this very word. For though Christ had spoken of Himself, and showed Himself among all as the Son, they had not yet recognised Him to be such, neither had they been able to apprehend or contemplate His real power. And Philip, not having been able to receive this, as far as it was possible to see it, requested to behold the Father. To whom then the Lord said, "Philip, have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." By which He means, If thou hast seen me, thou mayest know the Father through me. For through the image, which is like (the original), the Father is made readily known. But if thou hast not known the image, which is the Son, how dost thou seek to see the Father? And that this is the case is made clear by the rest of the chapter, which signifies that the Son who "has been set forth was sent from the Father, and goeth to the Father."

And for this reason three seasons of the year prefigured the Saviour Himself, so that He should fulfil the mysteries prophesied of Him. In the Passover season, so as to exhibit Himself as one destined to be sacrificed like a sheep, and to prove Himself the true Paschal-lamb, even as the apostle says, "Even Christ," who is God, "our passover was sacrificed for us." And at Pentecost so as to presignify the kingdom of heaven as He Himself first ascended to heaven and brought man as a gift to God.

Since Nicodemus had said, "We know that Thou art a teacher come from God," on this very point He sets him right, all but saying, "Think Me not a teacher in such manner as were the many of the prophets who were of earth, for I have come from heaven (but) now. None of the prophets hath ascended up thither, but I dwell there." Seest thou how even that which appears very exalted is utterly unworthy of his greatness? For not in heaven only is He, but everywhere, and He fills all things; but yet He speaks according to the infirmity of His hearer, desiring to lead him up little by little. And in this place He called not the flesh "Son of Man," but He now named, so to speak, His entire Self from the inferior substance; indeed this is His wont, to call His whole Person often from His Divinity, and often from His humanity.

It is the Son, too, who ascends to the heights of heaven, [John 3:13] and also descends to the inner parts of the earth. [Ephesians 4:9]

It is the Son, too, who ascends to the heights of heaven, and also descends to the inner parts of the earth.

And this, apparently, has nothing in common with what preceded it. But if one carefully examines the thought of the Lord, it will turn out that this too is closely related to what came before. Since Nicodemus called the Lord a Teacher and a Prophet, He says: "Do not consider Me a prophet who is of the earth, sent by God to teach, but consider Me as having come down from above, as the Son, and not as being of the earth. None of the prophets ascended into heaven, but only I alone am to ascend, just as I also descended." Having heard that the Son of Man came down "from heaven," do not think that the flesh came down from heaven. Indeed, Apollinarius thought this way, that Christ, having a body from heaven, passed through the Virgin as through a channel. But since Christ, consisting of two natures, was one Hypostasis or one Person, the names of the Man are applied to the Word, and again the names of the Word are applied to the Man. So here also it is said that the "Son of Man" came down from heaven, because He is one Person and one Hypostasis. Then, lest you, having heard "who came down," should think that the One who came down is no longer in heaven, He says "who is in heaven." Therefore, having heard that I came down, do not think that I am not there; but I am both present here bodily and seated there with the Father in Divinity.

But when thou hearest that the Son of man came down from heaven, think not that His flesh came down from heaven; for this is the doctrine of those heretics, who held that Christ took His Body from heaven, and only passed through the Virgin.

Jesus replied. Here he answers the question. First, he lays down the causes of spiritual regeneration. Secondly, he explains what he says (3:16). Now there are two causes of spiritual regeneration, namely, the mystery of the incarnation of Christ, and his passion. So first, he treats of the incarnation; secondly, of the passion (3:14).

Here we should consider, first of all, how this answer of Christ is an adequate reply to the question of Nicodemus. For above, when the Lord was speaking of the Spirit, he said: you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. We understand by this that spiritual regeneration has a hidden source and a hidden end. Now the things in heaven are hidden from us: "Who will search out the things in heaven?" (Wis 9:16). Therefore, the sense of Nicodemus' question, How can all this happen? is this: How can something come from the secret things of heaven or go to the secret things of heaven? So before answering, the Lord expressed this interpretation of the question, saying, how will you believe if I tell you of heavenly things?

And immediately he begins to show whose prerogative it is to ascend into heaven, namely, anyone who came down from heaven, according to the statement of Ephesians (4:10): "He who descended is he who ascended." This is verified even in natural things, namely, that each body tends to a place according to its origin or nature. And so in this way it can come about that someone, through the Spirit, may go to a place which carnal persons do not know, i.e., by ascending into heaven, if this is done through the power of one who descended from heaven: because he descended in order that, in ascending, he might open a way for us: "He ascends, opening the way before them" (Mi 2:13).

Some have fallen into error because of his saying, the One who came down from heaven, the Son of Man. For since Son of Man designates human nature, which is composed of soul and body, then because he says that the Son descended from heaven, Valentinus wanted to maintain that he even took his body from heaven and thus passed through the Virgin without receiving anything from her, as water passes through a pipe; so that his body was neither of an earthly substance nor taken from the Virgin. But this is contrary to the statement of the Apostle, writing to the Romans (1:3): "who was made from the seed of David according to the flesh."

On the other hand, Origen said that he descended from heaven as to his soul, which, he says, had been created along with the angels from the very beginning, and that later this soul descended from heaven and took flesh from the Virgin. But this also conflicts with the Catholic faith, which teaches that souls do not exist before their bodies.

Therefore, we should not understand that the Son of Man descended from heaven according to his human nature, but only according to his divine nature. For since in Christ there is one suppositum, or hypostasis, or person of the two natures, the divine and human natures, then no matter from which of these two natures this suppositum is named, divine and human things can be attributed to him. For we can say that the Son of Man created the stars and that the Son of God was crucified. But the Son of God was crucified, not according to his divine nature, but according to his human nature; and the Son of Man created the stars according to his divine nature. And so in things that are said of Christ, the distinction is not to be taken with respect to that about which they are said, because divine and human things are said of God and man indifferently; but a distinction must be made with respect to that according to which they are said, because divine things are said of Christ according to his divine nature, but human things according to his human nature. Thus, to descend from heaven is said of the Son of Man, not according to his human nature, but according to his divine nature, according to which it was appropriate to him to have been from heaven before the incarnation, as is said, "Heaven belongs to the Lord" (Ps 113:16).

He is said to have come down, but not by local motion, because then he would not have remained in heaven; for nothing which moves locally remains in the place from which it comes down. And so to exclude local motion, he adds, who lives in heaven. As if to say: He descended from heaven in such a way as yet to be in heaven. For he came down from heaven without ceasing to be above, yet assuming a nature which is from below. And because he is not enclosed or held fast by his body which exists on earth, he was, according to his divinity, in heaven and everywhere. And therefore to indicate that he is said to have come down in this way, because he assumed a human nature, he said, the Son of Man came down, i.e., insofar as he became Son of Man.

Or it can be said, as Hilary does, that he came down from heaven as to his body: not that the material of Christ's body came down from heaven, but that the power which formed it was from heaven.

But why does he say, No one has gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who lives in heaven? For have not Paul and Peter and the other saints gone up, according to 2 Corinthians (5:1): "We have a house in the heavens." I answer that no one goes up into heaven except Christ and his members, i.e., those believers who are just. Accordingly, the Son of God came down from heaven in order that, by making us his members, he might prepare us to ascend into heaven: now, indeed, in hope, but later in reality. "He has raised us up, and has given us a place in heaven in Christ Jesus" (Eph 2:6).

It was good that the Lord ordained that, by the lifting up of the brazen serpent, the wounds of those who were bitten should be healed; for the brazen serpent is a type of the cross.… In the same way, the world was crucified in its allurements. Therefore not a real but a brazen serpent was hung. This is so because the Lord took on himself the likeness of a sinner in his body but, in actuality, was without sin. In this way, he imitated a serpent through the deceitful appearance of human weakness, so that when he laid aside the slough of the flesh, he might destroy the cunning of the true serpent.

The cross is raised and appears above the earth, which until recently malice had kept hidden. It is raised, not to receive glory (for with Christ nailed to it what greater glory could it have?) but to give glory to God who is worshiped on it and proclaimed by it.… It is not surprising that the church rejoices in the cross of Christ and robes herself in festal clothes, revealing her bridal beauty as she honors this day. Nor is it surprising that this great throng of people has gathered together today to see the cross exposed aloft and to worship Christ whom they see raised upon it. For the cross is exposed in order to be raised and is raised to be exposed. What cross? The cross, which a little while ago was hidden in a place called The Skull but now is everywhere adored. This is what we rejoice over today; this is what we celebrate; this is the point of the present feast; this is the manifestation of the mystery.… For this hidden and life-giving cross had to be exposed, set on high like a city on a hill or a lamp on a stand, for all the world to see.

Let me try to explain, as far as the Lord enables me to, what these signs mean. The rod stands for the kingdom, the snake for mortality. It was by the snake that humanity was given death to drink. The Lord was prepared to take this death on himself. So when the rod came down to earth it had the form of a snake because the kingdom of God, which is Jesus Christ, came down to earth. He put on mortality, which he also nailed to the cross.… In his mercy God provided a remedy, a remedy that restored health at the time but also foretold the wisdom that was to come in the future.… Whoever has been bitten by the snakes of sin need only gaze on Christ and will have healing for the forgiveness of sins. And so, brothers, it is the mortality that the Lord took on himself that the church must go on experiencing as his body, of which he is the head, as man, in heaven. So the church experiences mortality, which was inflicted through the seduction of the serpent. We owe death to the sin of the first persons, but afterward we shall reach eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. But when does the church arrive at life and return to the kingdom? At the end of the world. That is why he took it by the tail, which is the end, in order to restore his rod to its original condition.

He endured death, then; but death He hanged on the cross, and mortal men are delivered from death. The Lord calls to mind a great matter, which was done in a figure with them of old: "And as Moses," saith He, "lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that every one who believeth on Him may not perish, but have everlasting life." A great mystery is here, as they who read know. Again, let them hear, as well they who have not read as they who have forgotten what perhaps they had heard or read. The people Israel were fallen helplessly in the wilderness by the bite of serpents; they suffered a great calamity by many deaths: for it was the stroke of God correcting and scourging them that He might instruct them. In this was shown a great mystery, the figure of a thing to come: the Lord Himself testifies in this passage, so that no man can give another interpretation than that which the truth indicates concerning itself. Now Moses was ordered by the Lord to make a brazen serpent, and to raise it on a pole in the wilderness, and to admonish the people Israel, that, when any had been bitten by a serpent, he should look to that serpent raised up on the pole. This was done: men were bitten; they looked and were healed. What are the biting serpents? Sins, from the mortality of the flesh. What is the serpent lifted up? The Lord's death on the cross. For as death came by the serpent, it was figured by the image of a serpent. The serpent's bite was deadly, the Lord's death is life-giving. A serpent is gazed on that the serpent may have no power. What is this? A death is gazed on, that death may have no power. But whose death? The death of life: if it may be said, the death of life; ay, for it may be said, but said wonderfully. But should it not be spoken, seeing it was a thing to be done? Shall I hesitate to utter that which the Lord has deigned to do for me? Is not Christ the life? And yet Christ hung on the cross. Is not Christ life? And yet Christ was dead. But in Christ's death, death died. Life dead slew death; the fullness of life swallowed up death; death was absorbed in the body of Christ. So also shall we say in the resurrection, when now triumphant we shall sing, "Where, O death, is thy contest? Where, O death, is thy sting?" Meanwhile brethren, that we may be healed from sin, let us now gaze on Christ crucified; for "as Moses," saith He, "lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth on Him may not perish, but have everlasting life." Just as they who looked on that serpent perished not by the serpent's bites, so they who look in faith on Christ's death are healed from the bites of sins. But those were healed from death to temporal life; whilst here He saith, "that they may have everlasting life." Now there is this difference between the figurative image and the real thing: the figure procured temporal life; the reality, of which that was the figure, procures eternal life.

(de Pecc. mer. et remiss. c. xxxii) Many dying in the wilderness from the attack of the serpents, Moses, by commandment of the Lord, lifted up a brazen serpent: and those who looked upon it were immediately healed. The lifting up of the serpent is the death of Christ; the cause, by a certain mode of construction, being put for the effect. The serpent was the cause of death, inasmuch as he persuaded man into that sin, by which he merited death. Our Lord, however, did not transfer sin, i. e. the poison of the serpent, to his flesh, but death; in order that in the likeness of sinful flesh, there might be punishment without sin, by virtue of which sinful flesh might be delivered both from punishment and from sin.

(Tr. xii. c. 11) As then formerly he who looked to the serpent that was lifted up, was healed of its poison, and saved from death; so now he who is conformed to the likeness of Christ's death by faith and the grace of baptism, is delivered both from sin by justification, and from death by the resurrection: as He Himself saith; That whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. What need then is there that the child should be conformed by baptism to the death of Christ, if he be not altogether tainted by the poisonous bite of the serpent?

(Tr. xii. c. 11) But there is this difference between the figure and the reality, that the one recovered from temporal death, the other from eternal.

With the wonderful skill of heavenly teaching, the Lord directs our attention to the teacher of the Mosaic law and to the spiritual meaning of his law, by recalling some of the ancient history and explaining that it happened as a figure of his own passion and of human salvation.

The sins that drag down soul and body to destruction at the same time are appropriately represented by the serpents, not only because they were fiery and poisonous [and] artful at bringing about death, but also because our first parents were led into sin by a serpent. And from being immortal they became mortal by sinning. The Lord is aptly made known by the bronze serpent, since he came in the likeness of sinful flesh. Just as the bronze serpent had the likeness of a fiery serpent but had absolutely none of the strength of harmful poison in its members—rather by being lifted up it cured those who had been stricken by the [live] serpents—so the Redeemer of the human race did not clothe himself in sinful flesh but in the likeness of sinful flesh, in order that by suffering death on the cross in [this likeness] he might free those who believed in him from all sin and even from death itself.Just as those who looked at the bronze serpent that had been lifted up as a sign were cured at that time from temporal death and the wounds that the serpents' bites had caused, so too those who look at the mystery of the Lord's passion by believing, confessing [and] sincerely imitating it are saved forever from every death they have incurred by sinning in mind and body.

He introduces the teacher of the Mosaic law, to the spiritual sense of that law; by a passage from the Old Testament history, which was intended to be a figure of His Passion, and of man's salvation.

Here the second point is touched upon, namely how the Son of God saves, namely through His passion. Therefore He says: "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert": Numbers 21: "Moses made a bronze serpent and set it up as a sign; those who had been struck, looking upon it, were healed." "So must the Son of Man be lifted up," namely on the gibbet of the cross, so that all who look upon Him through faith may be healed.

Chrysostom asks concerning what he says: "As Moses lifted up," etc.: why, when expressing the passion, did he not say "to hang on the cross," so as to speak more plainly?

I respond: It must be said that the Lord was revealing the mystery of the passion to Nicodemus as something honorable, as something credible, as something hidden: as something honorable, lest the man, still carnal, should despise and recoil from it; therefore he said "to be lifted up," not "to be hung." As something credible, so that he might give assent; therefore through the preceding marvelous figure he intimates the marvelous effect of the passion. Also as something hidden, so that he might hold it more dearly; and therefore he does not explain it but leaves him a place for meditating, and through this for making progress and for arriving at the gift of understanding.

That the Jews would fasten Christ to the cross. In Isaiah: "I have spread out my hands all day to a people disobedient and contradicting me, who walk in ways that are not good, but after their own sins." Also in Jeremiah: "Come, let us cast the tree into His bread, and let us blot out His life from the earth." Also in Deuteronomy: "And Thy life shall be hanging (in doubt) before Thine eyes; and Thou shall fear day and night, and shalt not trust to Thy life." Also in the twenty-first Psalm: "They tore my hands and my feet; they numbered all my bones. And they gazed upon me, and saw me, and divided my garments among them, and upon my vesture they cast a lot. But Thou, O Lord, remove not Thy help far from me; attend unto my help. Deliver my soul from the sword, and my only one from the paw of the dog. Save me from the mouth of the lion, and my lowliness from the horns of the unicorns. I will declare Thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the Church I will praise Thee." Also in the cxviiith Psalm: "Pierce my flesh with nails through fear of Thee." Also in the cxlth Psalm: "The lifting up of my hands is an evening sacrifice." Of which sacrifice Sophonias said: "Fear from the presence of the Lord God, since His day is near, because the Lord hath prepared His sacrifice, He hath sanctified His elect." Also in Zechariah: "And they shall look upon me, whom they have pierced." Also in the eighty-seventh Psalm: "I have called unto Thee, O Lord, the whole day; I have stretched out my hands unto Thee." Also in Numbers: "Not as a man is God suspended, nor as the son of man does He suffer threats." Whence in the Gospel the Lord says: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in the Son may have life eternal."

Him should not perish but have eternal life. Having explained sufficiently, and set before him the reason, why His Word of teaching does not run forth into the boundless and supernatural, but descends again to those things that were typically done by Moses of old, knowing that he could by leadings by means of figures scarce arrive at knowledge of the truth, rather than by the exactitude of spiritual inspirations, He saith He must surely be lifted up, as the serpent was by Moses, showing that search of history is most necessary, and all but saying to this man of no understanding, Search the Scriptures, for they are they which testify of Me. For serpents were springing upon them of Israel in the wilderness, and they, falling like ears of corn, and not a little distressed at this danger unexpectedly visiting them, with most piteous cry called for salvation from above and from God. But He, since He was Good and full of compassion, as God, commands Moses to set up a brazen serpent; and commands them therein to have a forethought of the salvation by faith. For the remedy to one bitten, was to look at the serpent put before him, and faith along with the sight wrought deliverance at the last extremity to the beholders. So much for the history. But it represents in act as it were in a type, the whole Mystery of the Incarnation. For the serpent signifies bitter and manslaying sin, which was devouring the whole race upon the earth, manifoldly biting the soul of man, and infusing the varied poison of wickedness. And no otherwise could we escape it thus conquering us, save by the succour alone which is from heaven. The Word of God then was made in the likeness oj sinful flesh, that He might condemn sin in the flesh, as it is written, and to those who gaze on Him with more steadfast faith, or by search into the Divine doctrines, might become the Giver of unending salvation. But the serpent being fixed upon a lofty base, signifies that Christ was altogether clear and manifest, so as to be unknown to none, or His being lifted up from the earth, as Himself says, by His Passion on the Cross.

This story is a type of the whole mystery of the incarnation. For the serpent signifies bitter and deadly sin, which was devouring the whole race on the earth … biting the Soul of man and infusing it with the venom of wickedness. And there is no way that we could have escaped being conquered by it, except by the relief that comes only from heaven. The Word of God then was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, "that he might condemn sin in the flesh," as it is written. In this way, he becomes the Giver of unending salvation to those who comprehend the divine doctrines and gaze on him with steadfast faith. But the serpent, being fixed upon a lofty base, signifies that Christ was clearly manifested by his passion on the cross, so that none could fail to see him.

It was shown by the brazen [serpent], which by its nature cannot suffer, that he would suffer on the cross, who by his nature cannot die.

Now, he says, the stars are the gods of destruction, which impose upon existent things the necessity of alterable generation. These, he says, Moses denominated serpents of the wilderness, which gnaw and utterly ruin those who imagined that they had crossed the Red Sea. To those, then, he says, who of the children of Israel were bitten in the wilderness, Moses exhibited the real and perfect serpent; and they who believed on this serpent were not bitten in the wilderness, that is, (were not assailed) by (evil) powers. No one therefore, he says, is there who is able to save and deliver those that come forth from Egypt, that is, from the body and from this world, unless alone the serpent that is perfect and replete with fulness. Upon this (serpent), he says, he who fixes his hope is not destroyed by the snakes of the wilderness, that is, by the gods of generation. (This statement) is written, he says, in a book of Moses. This serpent, he says, is the power that attended Moses, the rod that was turned into a serpent. The serpents, however, of the magicians-(that is,) the gods of destruction-withstood the power of Moses in Egypt, but the rod of Moses reduced them all to subjection and slew them. This universal serpent is, he says, the wise discourse of Eve. This, he says, is the mystery of Edem, this the river of Edem; this the mark that was set upon Cain, that any one who findeth him might not kill him. This, he says, is Cain, whose sacrifice the god of this world did not accept. The gory sacrifice, however, of Abel he approved of; for the ruler of this world rejoices in (offerings of) blood. This, he says, is he who appeared in the last days, in form of a man, in the times of Herod, being born after the likeness of Joseph, who was sold by the hand of his brethren, to whom alone belonged the coat of many colours. This, he says, is he who is according to the likeness of Esau, whose garment-he not being himself present-was blessed; who did not receive, he says, the benediction uttered by him of enfeebled vision. He acquired, however, wealth from a source independent of this, receiving nothing from him whose eyes were dim; and Jacob saw his countenance, as a man beholds the face of God. In regard of this, he says, it has been written that "Nebrod was a mighty hunter before the Lord." And there are, he says, many who closely imitate this (Nimrod): as numerous are they as the gnawing (serpents) which were seen in the wilderness by the children of Israel, from which that perfect serpent which Moses set up delivered those that were bitten. This, he says, is that which has been declared: "In the same manner as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so also must the Son of man be lifted up." According to the likeness of this was made in the desert the brazen serpent which Moses set up. Of this alone, he says, the image is in heaven, always conspicuous in light.

Now, He suffered all these things for us; and He suffered them really, and not in appearance only, even as also He truly rose again. But not, as some of the unbelievers, who are ashamed of the formation of man, and the cross, and death itself, affirm, that in appearance only, and not in truth, He took a body of the Virgin, and suffered only in appearance, forgetting, as they do, Him who said, "The Word was made flesh; " and again, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up; " and once more, "If I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto Me." The Word therefore did dwell in flesh, for "Wisdom built herself an house." The Word raised up again His own temple on the third day, when it had been destroyed by the Jews fighting against Christ. The Word, when His flesh was lifted up, after the manner of the brazen serpent in the wilderness, drew all men to Himself for their eternal salvation.

Let them not therefore ascribe to the law the unbelief of certain [among them]. For the law never hindered them from believing in the Son of God; nay, but it even exhorted them so to do, saying that men can be saved in no other way from the old wound of the serpent than by believing in Him who, in the likeness of sinful flesh, is lifted up from the earth upon the tree of martyrdom, and draws all things to Himself, and vivifies the dead.

After having spoken of the very great benefaction that had come to man by Baptism, He proceeds to mention another benefaction, which was the cause of this, and not inferior to it; namely, that by the Cross. As also Paul arguing with the Corinthians sets down these benefits together, when he says, "Was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul?" for these two things most of all declare His unspeakable love, that He both suffered for His enemies, and that having died for His enemies, He freely gave to them by Baptism entire remission of their sins.

But wherefore did He not say plainly, "I am about to be crucified," instead of referring His hearers to the ancient type? First, that you may learn that old things are akin to new, and that the one are not alien to the other; next, that you may know that He came not unwillingly to His Passion; and again, besides these reasons, that you may learn that no harm arises to Him from the Fact, and that to many there springs from it salvation. For, that none may say, "And how is it possible that they who believe on one crucified should be saved, when he himself is holden of death?" He leads us to the ancient story. Now if the Jews, by looking to the brazen image of a serpent, escaped death, much rather will they who believe on the Crucified, with good reason enjoy a far greater benefit. For this takes place, not through the weakness of the Crucified, or because the Jews are stronger than He, but because "God loved the world," therefore is His living Temple fastened to the Cross.

And it seems that the type and sign, which was erected to counteract the serpents which bit Israel, was intended for the salvation of those who believe that death was declared to come thereafter on the serpent through Him that would be crucified, but salvation to those who had been bitten by him and had betaken themselves to Him that sent His Son into the world to be crucified. For the Spirit of prophecy by Moses did not teach us to believe in the serpent, since it shows us that he was cursed by God from the beginning; and in Isaiah tells us that he shall be put to death as an enemy by the mighty sword, which is Christ.

For tell me, was it not God who commanded by Moses that no image or likeness of anything which was in heaven above or which was on the earth should be made, and yet who caused the brazen serpent to be made by Moses in the wilderness, and set it up for a sign by which those bitten by serpents were saved? Yet is He free from unrighteousness. For by this, as I previously remarked, He proclaimed the mystery, by which He declared that He would break the power of the serpent which occasioned the transgression of Adam, and [would bring] to them that believe on Him [who was foreshadowed] by this sign, i.e., Him who was to be crucified, salvation from the fangs of the serpent, which are wicked deeds, idolatries, and other unrighteous acts. Unless the matter be so understood, give me a reason why Moses set up the brazen serpent for a sign, and bade those that were bitten gaze at it, and the wounded were healed; and this, too, when he had himself commanded that no likeness of anything whatsoever should be made.

I say nothing of what was figured by this cure. Thus, too, the golden Cherubim and Seraphim were purely an ornament in the figured fashion of the ark; adapted to ornamentation for reasons totally remote from all condition of idolatry, on account of which the making a likeness is prohibited; and they are evidently not at variance with this law of prohibition, because they are not found in that form of similitude, in reference to which the prohibition is given.

Christ Himself (they say further) in His gospel imitates Moses' serpent's sacred power, in saying: "And as Moses upreared the serpent in the desert, so it behoveth the Son of man to be upreared." Him they introduce to bless their eucharistic (elements).

Having spoken before about regeneration through baptism, he then speaks also of the benefaction accomplished for us through the cross. For the cross and death are the cause of the grace bestowed upon us through baptism, since in baptism we portray the death of the Lord. He does not say directly that I will be crucified, but recalls the serpent and the ancient history (Num. 21:5–9), and in this way accomplishes several things at once: on the one hand, He teaches us that the old is akin to the new and that the Lawgiver of the Old and New Testaments is one and the same, although Marcion, Manes, and the rest of the assembly of such heretics reject the Old Testament, saying that it is the legislation of an evil demiurge (craftsman); on the other hand, He teaches that if the Jews escaped death by looking upon the bronze image of the serpent, then all the more shall we escape the death of the soul by looking upon the Crucified One and believing in Him. Compare, if you will, the type with the reality. There, a likeness of a serpent, having the appearance of a serpent but not having its venom: so too here, the Lord is Man, but free from the venom of sin, having come in the likeness of sinful flesh, that is, in the likeness of flesh subject to sin, but He Himself is not sinful flesh. Then, those who looked were delivered from bodily death, while we are delivered from spiritual death. Then, the one hung up healed from the bites of serpents, but now Christ heals the wounds inflicted by the dragon of the mind. When you hear "must be lifted up," understand it thus: to be hung. For He was hung on high, so that He who sanctified the earth by walking upon it might also sanctify the air. Understand "to be lifted up" also thus: to be glorified. For the cross truly became the exaltation and glory of Christ. By that in which He seemed condemned, He condemned the prince of this world. I will explain a little. Adam died justly, because he sinned. The Lord died not by a debt of justice, because He did not sin. Before the crucifixion of the Lord, death justly held dominion over men. But since the Lord was found to be without sin, what could the devil find in Him deserving of death? And since He was put to death unjustly, He conquered the one who killed Him, and in this way also freed Adam from the death that was justly inflicted upon him as one who had sinned. And in another way. Two things dominated over the human race: pleasure and sorrow. The Lord, having passed through both, proved unconquerable. The tempter first approached Him on the mountain with the offer of pleasure (Matt. 4:3, 6, 9); but, finding Him unconquerable through this, he employed great cunning, bringing sorrow, so that at least through it he might master Him, and for this he raised up everything against Him: the denial of the disciples, the mockery of the soldiers, the blasphemy of the passersby, death at the hands of the Jews, but even in this he found Him unconquerable. For the sorrow on the cross could not arouse in the Lord hatred toward those who crucified Him, but He continued to love them and prayed for them, saying: "Father, do not hold this sin against them" (Luke 23:34). Do you see how He conquered by that through which He appeared to have been conquered? Thus, the cross became both His exaltation and His glory.

(in loc.) See then the aptness of the figure. The figure of the serpent has the appearance of the beast, but not its poison: in the same way Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh, being free from sin. By Christ's being lifted up, understand His being suspended on high, by which suspension He sanctified the air, even as He had sanctified the earth by walking upon it. Herein too is typified the glory of Christ: for the height of the cross was made His glory: for in that He submitted to be judged, He judged the prince of this world; for Adam died justly, because he sinned; our Lord unjustly, because He did no sin. So He overcame him, who delivered Him over to death, and thus delivered Adam from death. And in this the devil found himself vanquished, that he could not upon the cross torment our Lord into hating His murderers: but only made Him love and pray for them the more. In this way the cross of Christ was made His lifting up, and glory.

Here he mentions the mystery of the passion, in virtue of which baptism has its efficacy: "We who have been baptized into Christ Jesus, have been baptized into his death" (Rom 6:3). And with regard to this he does three things. First, he gives a symbol for the passion. Secondly, the manner of the passion. Thirdly, the fruit of the passion.

He takes the symbol from the old law, in order to adapt to the understanding of Nicodemus; so he says, Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert. This refers to Numbers (21:5) when the Lord, faced with the Jewish people saying, "We are sick of this useless food," sent serpents to punish them; and when the people came to Moses and he interceded with the Lord, the Lord commanded that for a remedy they make a serpent of bronze; and this was to serve both as a remedy against those serpents and as a symbol of the Lord's passion. Hence it says that this bronze serpent was lifted up as a sign (Nm 21:9).

Now it is characteristic of serpents that they are poisonous, but not so the serpent of bronze, although it was a symbol of a poisonous serpent. So, too, Christ did not have sin, which is also a poison: "Sin, when it is fully developed, brings forth death" (Jas 1:15); but he had the likeness of sin: "God sent his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh" (Rom 8:3). And thus Christ had the effect of the serpent against the insurgence of inflamed concupiscences.

He shows the manner of the passion when he says, so must the Son of Man be lifted up: and this refers to the lifting up of the cross. So below (12:34) when it says, "The Son of Man must be lifted up," it also has, "He said this to indicate the manner of his death."

He willed to die lifted up, first of all, to cleanse the heavens: for since he had cleansed the things on earth by the sanctity of his life, the things of the air were left to be cleansed by his death: "through him he should reconcile all things to himself, whether on earth or in the heavens, making peace through his blood" (Col 1:20). Secondly, to triumph over the demons who prepare for war in the air: "the prince of the power of the air" (Eph 2:2). Thirdly, he wished to die lifted up to draw our hearts to himself: "I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all to myself" (below 12:32). And fourthly, because in the death of the cross he was lifted up in the sense that there he triumphed over his enemies; so it is not called a death, but a lifting up: "He will drink from the stream on the way, therefore he will lift up his head" (Ps 109:7). Fifthly, he willed to die lifted up because the cross was the reason for his being lifted up, i.e., exalted: "He became obedient to the Father even to death, the death of the cross; on account of which God has exalted him" (Phil 2:8).

"That everyone who believes in Him may not perish, but may have eternal life": in chapter 11: "He who believes in Me, even if he shall have died, shall live; and everyone who lives and believes in Me shall not die forever." He most fittingly describes the passion in relation to the figure, so that it may become more credible; and most fittingly did the figure precede, because, just as there they were not healed by the serpent unless they looked upon it, so neither are they healed through Christ unless they believe in Him.

The question concerns what he says: "That everyone who believes in him may not perish." Therefore no one who has faith will be condemned, however wicked he may be. If you say that this is understood of formed faith, then according to this no one who has formed faith can be condemned.

I respond: It must be said that here he speaks of true faith; but true faith excludes a twofold pretense. For faith is feigned either because one believes but does not love, or because one believes and loves but does not persevere. True faith, therefore, is that which loves what it believes and perseveres; and everyone such will be saved.

Seest thou the cause of the Crucifixion, and the salvation which is by it? Seest thou the relationship of the type to the reality? there the Jews escaped death, but the temporal, here believers the eternal; there the hanging serpent healed the bites of serpents, here the Crucified Jesus cured the wounds inflicted by the spiritual dragon; there he who looked with his bodily eyes was healed, here he who beholds with the eyes of his understanding put off all his sins; there that which hung was brass fashioned into the likeness of a serpent, here it was the Lord's Body, builded by the Spirit; there a serpent bit and a serpent healed, here death destroyed and a Death saved. But the snake which destroyed had venom, that which saved was free from venom; and so again was it here, for the death which slew us had sin with it, as the serpent had venom; but the Lord's Death was free from all sin, as the brazen serpent from venom. For, saith Peter, "He did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth." And this is what Paul also declares, "And having spoiled principalities and powers, He made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it." For as some noble champion by lifting on high and dashing down his antagonist, renders his victory more glorious, so Christ, in the sight of all the world, cast down the adverse powers, and having healed those who were smitten in the wilderness, delivered them from all venomous beasts that vexed them, by being hung upon the Cross. Yet He did not say, "must hang," but, "must be lifted up"; for He used this which seemed the milder term, on account of His hearer, and because it was proper to the type.

Now the fruit of Christ's passion is eternal life; hence he says, so that everyone who believes in him, performing good works, may not be lost, but have eternal life. And this fruit corresponds to the fruit of the symbolic serpent. For whoever looked upon the serpent of bronze was freed from poison and his life was preserved. But he who looks upon the lifted up Son of Man, and believes in the crucified Christ, he is freed from poison and sin: "Whoever believes in me will never die" (below 11:26), and is preserved for eternal life. "These things are written that you may believe... and that believing you may have life in his name" (below 20:31).

Truly through the Son of God shall the world have life; for for no other cause came He into the world, except to save the world. God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

For He came down and died, and by that death delivered us from death: being slain by death, He slew death. And you know, brethren, that this death entered into the world through the devil's envy. "God made not death," saith the Scripture, "nor delights He in the destruction of the living; but He created all things to be." But what saith it here? "But by the devil's envy, death entered into the whole world." To the death offered for our entertainment by the devil, man would not come by constraint; for the devil had not the power of forcing, but only cunning to persuade. Hadst thou not consented, the devil had brought in nothing: thy own consenting, O man, led thee to death. Of the mortal are mortals born; from immortals we are become mortals. From Adam all men are mortal; but Jesus the Son of God, the Word of God, by which all things were made, the only Son equal with the Father, was made mortal: "for the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us."

He endured death, then; but death He hanged on the cross, and mortal men are delivered from death. The Lord calls to mind a great matter, which was done in a figure with them of old: "And as Moses," saith He, "lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that every one who believeth on Him may not perish, but have everlasting life." A great mystery is here, as they who read know. Again, let them hear, as well they who have not read as they who have forgotten what perhaps they had heard or read. The people Israel were fallen helplessly in the wilderness by the bite of serpents; they suffered a great calamity by many deaths: for it was the stroke of God correcting and scourging them that He might instruct them. In this was shown a great mystery, the figure of a thing to come: the Lord Himself testifies in this passage, so that no man can give another interpretation than that which the truth indicates concerning itself. Now Moses was ordered by the Lord to make a brazen serpent, and to raise it on a pole in the wilderness, and to admonish the people Israel, that, when any had been bitten by a serpent, he should look to that serpent raised up on the pole. This was done: men were bitten; they looked and were healed. What are the biting serpents? Sins, from the mortality of the flesh. What is the serpent lifted up? The Lord's death on the cross. For as death came by the serpent, it was figured by the image of a serpent. The serpent's bite was deadly, the Lord's death is life-giving. A serpent is gazed on that the serpent may have no power. What is this? A death is gazed on, that death may have no power. But whose death? The death of life: if it may be said, the death of life; ay, for it may be said, but said wonderfully. But should it not be spoken, seeing it was a thing to be done? Shall I hesitate to utter that which the Lord has deigned to do for me? Is not Christ the life? And yet Christ hung on the cross. Is not Christ life? And yet Christ was dead. But in Christ's death, death died. Life dead slew death; the fullness of life swallowed up death; death was absorbed in the body of Christ. So also shall we say in the resurrection, when now triumphant we shall sing, "Where, O death, is thy contest? Where, O death, is thy sting?" Meanwhile brethren, that we may be healed from sin, let us now gaze on Christ crucified; for "as Moses," saith He, "lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth on Him may not perish, but have everlasting life." Just as they who looked on that serpent perished not by the serpent's bites, so they who look in faith on Christ's death are healed from the bites of sins. But those were healed from death to temporal life; whilst here He saith, "that they may have everlasting life." Now there is this difference between the figurative image and the real thing: the figure procured temporal life; the reality, of which that was the figure, procures eternal life.

Thus did God love the human race, that He gave His only begotten Son for the life of the world. For unless the Father had delivered life, we would not have life; and unless that life itself had died, death would not have been slain. Indeed, the Lord Christ Himself is life, of whom the evangelist John says: This is the true God, and eternal life. He also, by the Prophet, threatened death with death, saying: I will be your death, O death; I will be your sting, O hell! As if He were saying: By dying, I will slay you, I will consume you, I will take away all your power, I will rescue the captives you held. You wished to hold the innocent; it is just that you lose those you wished to hold.

Our Redeemer and Maker, who was Son of God before the ages, became Son of man at the end of ages. Thus the one who, through the power of his divinity, had created us to enjoy the happiness of everlasting life, might himself restore us, through the weakness of our humanity, to recover the life we had lost.

Note here, that the same which he before said of the Son of man, lifted up on the cross, he repeats of the only begotten Son of God: viz. That whosoever believeth in Him, &c. For the same our Maker and Redeemer, who was Son of God before the world was, was made at the end of the world the Son of man; so that He who by the power of His Godhead had created us to enjoy the happiness of an endless life, the same restored us to the life we have lost by taking our human frailty upon Him.

Here the third point is touched upon, namely the motivating reason for saving in this way; and this was the immensity of divine love toward lost mankind. On account of which He says: "For God so loved the world," that is, worldly and sinful man: that "He gave His Only-begotten Son": Ephesians 2: "God, who is rich in mercy, on account of His exceeding charity with which He loved us, when we were dead in sins, made us alive together with Christ." Therefore exceeding, because He gave more than was necessary: Romans 8: "He who did not spare even His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all." He gave Him, I say, for all as regards sufficiency, but as regards efficacy, for the elect and for believers. Therefore He adds: "That everyone who believes in Him" may not "perish, but may have eternal life." The passion avails none but believers, because, as it is said in Hebrews 11, "without faith it is impossible to please God."

But as soon as you look at any real Christian writings, you find that they are talking about something quite different from this popular religion. They say that Christ is the Son of God (whatever that means). They say that those who give Him their confidence can also become Sons of God (whatever that means). They say that His death saved us from our sins (whatever that means).

To beget is to become the father of: to create is to make. And the difference is this. When you beget, you beget something of the same kind as yourself. A man begets human babies, a beaver begets little beavers and a bird begets eggs which turn into little birds. But when you make, you make something of a different kind from yourself. A bird makes a nest, a beaver builds a dam, a man makes a wireless set—or he may make something more like himself than a wireless set: say, a statue. If he is a clever enough carver he may make a statue which is very like a man indeed. But, of course, it is not a real man; it only looks like one. It cannot breathe or think. It is not alive.

Now that is the first thing to get clear. What God begets is God; just as what man begets is man. What God creates is not God; just as what man makes is not man. That is why men are not Sons of God in the sense that Christ is.

He desireth to show openly herein, that He is God by Nature, since one must needs deem that He Who came forth from God the Father, is surely God also, not having the honour from without, as we have, but being in truth what He is believed to be. With exceeding skill does He say this, having joined therewith the love of God the Father to us, well and opportunely coming to discourse thereon. For He shames the unbelieving Nicodemus, yea rather, He shows that he is ungodly also. For the not coming readily to believe, when God teaches anything, what else is it, than laying upon the Truth a charge of falsehood? Besides this, in saying that He was given for the life of the world, He persuades him to consider seriously, of how great punishment they will be in danger, who from their mad folly, have made of no account so wondrous grace of God the Father. For God, says He, so loved the world that He gave His Only Begotten Son.

Let the Christ-opposing heretic again hear, and let him come forward and say, what is the greatness of the Love of God the Father, or how we should reasonably marvel at it. But he will say that the marvel of the love is seen, in His giving His Son for us, and that the Only Begotten. In order then that the great love of God the Father may remain and be preserved, let Him be held to be Son not a creature, I mean Son of the Essence of the Father, that is to say, Consubstantial with Him Who begat Him, and God verily and in truth. But if, according to thy speech, o thou, He possesseth not the being of the Essence of God the Father, He will also lose the being by Nature Son and God, and the wide-spread marvel of the Love of God will at length come to nought: for He gave a creature for creatures, and not truly His Son. Vainly too will the blessed Paul trouble us, saying, He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden under foot the Son of God? For confessedly he that despised trampleth under foot, but not the Very Son, but a fellow servant of Moses, if indeed creature be always akin to creature, in respect at least of having been made, even if it surpass the glory of another, in the excellences of being greater or better. But the word of Paul is true; and a severer penalty shall he pay who hath trodden under foot the Son, not as though he were transgressing against a creature, or one of the fellow servants of Moses. Great then and above nature is the Love of the Father, Who for the life of the world gave His Own Son and Who is of Himself.

Abraham had many servants. Why did he [God] not tell him to offer up one of them as a sacrifice? It was only because his love would not be shown in a servant. His son was thus needed, so that through him Abraham's love would be revealed. God had servants like this, but he did not show his love through any of them for his creatures, but rather through his Son, so that through him his love toward us might be proclaimed.…From [the time of] Abraham, the symbols of the wood and of the lamb began to take shape. Isaac was a symbol of the lamb [caught] in the tree, and Jacob showed the wood that was life-giving for water. Thus wood was esteemed as worthy for him to hang upon it, because not a bone in him was broken. As for the earth, its fruits are stimulated by wood, and for the sea, its treasures are taken by means of wood. This is also the case for the body and the soul. Thus it [the wood of the cross] was carved by the fury of the savage crowd. It was like a mute person in its silence, but in its use it bore fruit exalting the status of human beings.

Let us praise the Son first of all, venerating the blood that expiated our sins. He lost nothing of his divinity when he saved me, when like a good physician he stooped to my festering wounds. He was a mortal man, but he was also God. He was of the race of David but Adam's creator. He who has no body clothed himself with flesh. He had a mother who, nonetheless, was a virgin. He who is without bounds bound himself with the cords of our humanity. He was victim and high priest—yet he was God. He offered up his blood and cleansed the whole world. He was lifted up on the cross, but it was sin that was nailed to it. He became as one among the dead, but he rose from the dead, raising to life also many who had died before him. On the one hand, there was the poverty of his humanity; on the other, the riches of his divinity. Do not let what is human in the Son permit you wrongfully to detract from what is divine. For the sake of the divine, hold in the greatest honor the humanity, which the immortal Son took on himself for love of you.

God, who loved the world, gave his only begotten Son as a manifest token of his love. If the evidence of his love is this, that he bestowed a creature on creatures, gave a worldly being on the world's behalf, granted one raised up from nothing for the redemption of objects equally raised up from nothing, such a cheap and petty sacrifice is a poor assurance of his favor toward us. Gifts of price are the evidence of affection: the greatness of the surrender is evidence of the greatness of the love. God, who loved the world, gave no adopted son but his own, his only begotten [Son]. Here is personal interest, true sonship, sincerity; not creation, or adoption, or pretence. Here is the proof of his love and affection, that he gave his own, his only begotten Son.

(vi. de Trin. c. 40) If it were only a creature given up for the sake of a creature, such a poor and insignificant loss were no great evidence of love. They must be precious things which prove our love, great things must evidence its greatness. God, in love to the world, gave His Son, not an adopted Son, but His own, even His Only Begotten. Here is proper Sonship, birth, truth: no creation, no adoption, no lie: here is the test of love and charity, that God sent His own and only begotten Son to save the world.

The sum of all is God, the Lord of all, who from love of his creatures has delivered his Son to death on the cross. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son for it. Not that he was unable to save us in another way, but in this way it was possible to show us his abundant love abundantly, namely, by bringing us near to him by the death of his Son. If he had anything more dear to him, he would have given it to us, in order that by it our race might be his. And out of his great love he did not even choose to urge our freedom by compulsion, though he was able to do so. But his aim was that we should come near to him by the love of our mind. And our Lord obeyed his Father out of love for us.

What He saith, is of this kind: Marvel not that I am to be lifted up that ye may be saved, for this seemeth good to the Father, and He hath so loved you as to give His Son for slaves, and ungrateful slaves. Yet a man would not do this even for a friend, nor readily even for a righteous man; as Paul has declared when he said, "Scarcely for a righteous man will one die." Now he spoke at greater length, as speaking to believers, but here Christ speaks concisely, because His discourse was directed to Nicodemus, but still in a more significant manner, for each word had much significance. For by the expression, "so loved," and that other, "God the world," He shows the great strength of His love. Large and infinite was the interval between the two. He, the immortal, who is without beginning, the Infinite Majesty, they but dust and ashes, full of ten thousand sins, who, ungrateful, have at all times offended Him; and these He "loved." Again, the words which He added after these are alike significant, when He saith, that "He gave His Only-begotten Son," not a servant, not an Angel, not an Archangel. And yet no one would show such anxiety for his own child, as God did for His ungrateful servants.

His Passion then He sets before him not very openly, but rather darkly; but the advantage of the Passion He adds in a clearer manner, saying, "That every one that believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." For when He had said, "must be lifted up," and alluded to death, lest the hearer should be made downcast by these words, forming some mere human opinions concerning Him, and supposing that His death was a ceasing to be, observe how He sets this right, by saying, that He that was given was "The Son of God," and the cause of life, of everlasting life. He who procured life for others by death, would not Himself be continually in death; for if they who believed on the Crucified perish not, much less doth He perish who is crucified. He who taketh away the destitution of others much more is He free from it; He who giveth life to others, much more to Himself doth He well forth life. Seest thou that everywhere there is need of faith? For He calls the Cross the fountain of life; which reason cannot easily allow, as the heathens now by their mocking testify. But faith which goes beyond the weakness of reasoning, may easily receive and retain it. And whence did God "so love the world"? From no other source but only from his goodness.

In His address to Nicodemus He says: "So God loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." And again: "For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

The love of God for the world is great and extended so far that He gave not an angel, not a prophet, but His Son, and moreover His Only-Begotten (1 John 4:9). If He had given even an angel, that deed would not have been small. Why? Because an angel is His faithful and obedient servant, while we are enemies and apostates. But now, when He gave His Son, what surpassing love He showed! Again, if He had many sons and gave one, even that would have been a very great thing. But now He gave His Only-Begotten. Can His goodness then be worthily praised? The Arians say that the Son is called Only-begotten because He alone was produced and created by God, while everything else was then created by Him. The answer to them is simple. If He had been called Only-begotten without the word "Son," then your subtle invention would have had a basis. But now, since He is called both Only-begotten and Son, the word "Only-begotten" cannot be understood as you understand it, but rather that He alone was begotten of the Father. Note, I ask you, that just as above He said that the Son of Man came down from heaven, not meaning that His flesh did come down from heaven, but He attributed what belongs to God to the man on account of the unity of the Person and the unity of the Hypostasis, so here again He attributes what belongs to the man to God the Word. "God gave," He says, "His Son to death." Although God remained impassible, yet since by Hypostasis One and the Same was both God the Word and Man subject to suffering, it is said that the Son is given over to death, who indeed also suffered in His own flesh. What is the benefit of the Son being given? It is great and inconceivable for man — that everyone who believes in Him should receive two blessings: one, that he should not perish; the other, that he should have life, and moreover eternal life. The Old Testament promised long life to those who pleased God in it, but the Gospel rewards such people with life not temporal, but eternal and indestructible.

(in loc.) As He said above, that the Son of man came down from heaven, not meaning that His flesh did come down from heaven, on account of the unity of person in Christ, attributing to man what belonged to God: so now conversely what belongs to man, he assigns to God the Word. The Son of God was impassible; but being one in respect of person with man, who was passible, the Son is said to be given up to death; inasmuch as He truly suffered, not in His own nature, but in His own flesh. From this death follows an exceeding great and incomprehensible benefit: viz. that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. The Old Testament promised to those who obeyed it, length of days: the Gospel promises life eternal, and imperishable.

Above, the Lord assigned as the cause of spiritual regeneration the coming down of the Son and the lifting up of the Son of Man; and he set forth its fruit, which is eternal life. But this fruit seemed unbelievable to men laboring under the necessity of dying. And so now the Lord explains this. First, he proves the greatness of the fruit from the greatness of God's love. Secondly, he rejects a certain reply (v 17).

Here we should note that the cause of all our good is the Lord and divine love. For to love is, properly speaking, to will good to someone. Therefore, since the will of God is the cause of things, good comes to us because God loves us. And God's love is the cause of the good of nature: "You love everything which exists" (Wis 11:25). It is also the cause of the good which is grace: "I have loved you with an everlasting love, and so I have drawn you" i.e., through grace (Jer 31:3). But it is because of his great love that he gives us the good of glory. So he shows us here, from four standpoints, that this love of God is the greatest.

First, from the person of the one loving, because it is God who loves, and immeasurably. So he says, For God so loved: "He has loved the people; all the holy ones are in his hand" (Dt 33:3). Secondly, from the condition of the one who is loved, because it is man, a bodily creature of the world, i.e., existing in sin: "God shows his love for us, because while we were still his enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son" (Rom 5:8). Thus he says, the world. Thirdly, from the greatness of his gifts, for love is shown by a gift; as Gregory says: "The proof of love is given by action." But God has given us the greatest of gifts, his Only Begotten Son, and so he says, that he gave his Only Begotten Son. "God did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for all of us" (Rom 8:32).

He says his Son, i.e., his natural Son, consubstantial, not an adopted son, i.e., not those sons of which the Psalmist says: "I said: You are gods" (Ps 81:6). This shows that the opinion of Arius is false: for if the Son of God were a creature, as he said, the immensity of God's love through the taking on of infinite goodness, which no creature can receive, could not have been revealed in him. He further says Only Begotten, to show that God does not have a love divided among many sons, but all of it is for that Son whom he gave to prove the immensity of his love: "For the Father loves the Son, and shows him everything that he does" (below 5:20).

Fourthly, from the greatness of its fruit, because through him we have eternal life. Hence he says, so that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life, which he obtained for us through the death of the cross.

But did God give his Son with the intention that he should die on the cross? He did indeed give him for the death of the cross inasmuch as he gave him the will to suffer on it. And he did this in two ways. First, because as the Son of God he willed from eternity to assume flesh and to suffer for us; and this will he had from the Father. Secondly, because the will to suffer was infused into the soul of Christ by God.

Note that above, when the Lord was speaking about the coming down which belongs to Christ according to his divinity, he called him the Son of God; and this because of the one suppositum of the two natures, as was explained above. And so divine things can be said about the suppositum of the human nature, and human things can be said about the suppositum of the divine nature, but not with reference to the same nature. Rather, divine things are said with reference to the divine nature, and human things with reference to the human nature. Now the specific reason why he here calls him the Son of God is that he set forth that gift as a sign of the divine love, through which the fruit of eternal life comes to us. And so, he should have been called by that name which indicates the power that produces eternal life; and this power is not in Christ as Son of Man but as Son of God: "This is the true God and eternal life," as we read in 1 John (5:20); "In him was life" (above 1:4).

Note also that he says, should not perish. Someone is said to be perishing when he is hindered from arriving at the end to which he is ordained. But the end to which man is ordained is eternal life, and as long as he sins, he turns himself from that end. And although while he is living he cannot entirely perish in the sense that he cannot be restored, yet when he dies in sin, then he entirely perishes: "The way of the wicked will perish" (Ps 1:7).

He indicates the immensity of God's love in saying, have eternal life: for by giving eternal life, he gives himself. For eternal life is nothing else than enjoying God. But to give oneself is a sign of great love: "But God, who is rich in mercy, has brought us to life in Christ" (Eph 2:5), i.e., he gave us eternal life.

"For God sent not His Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world through Him may be saved." So far, then, as it lies in the physician, He is come to heal the sick. He that will not observe the orders of the physician destroys himself. He is come a Saviour to the world: why is He called the Saviour of the world, but that He is come to save the world, not to judge the world? Thou wilt not be saved by Him; thou shalt be judged of thyself.

(Tr. xii. c. 12) For why is He called the Saviour of the world, but because Ho saves the world? The physician, so far as his will is concerned, heals the sick. If the sick despises or will not observe the directions of the physician, he destroys himself.

He shows that our damnation is not on the part of God, when he says: and it should be continued thus from the preceding: I have truly said that God gave His Son, "that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life," not, I say, that he be condemned. "For God did not send His Son into the world to judge the world," namely by condemning it, "but that the world might be saved through Him": 1 John 3: "In this we have known the love of God, that He first loved us and sent His Son as a propitiation for our sins," therefore for the purpose of propitiation, not for condemnation.

But a question arises concerning what he says, that "he did not send his Son into the world to judge." Against this: It is stated in chapter 5: "The Father has given all judgment to the Son."

I respond: There is a twofold coming: the first and the second, the first of mercy, the second of justice. In the first he came to propitiate, not to judge, but in the second he will come to judge.

My argument, accordingly, good reader, holds sure that he never wrought for the punishment of man but for his benefit, and he himself elsewhere exclaims: For the Father hath not sent the Son to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.

Having plainly called Himself the Son of God the Father, He thought not good to leave the word without witness, but brings forward proof from the quality, so to say, of the things themselves, making the hearers more steadfast unto faith. For I was not sent, saith He, like the law-expounder Moses, condemning the world by the law, nor introducing the commandment unto conviction of sin, nor do I perform a servile ministry, but I introduce loving-kindness befitting the Master: I free the embondaged, as Son and Heir of the Father, I transform the law that condemneth into grace that justifieth, I release from sin him that is holden with the cords of his transgressions, I am come to save the world, not to condemn it. For it was right, it was right, saith He, that Moses, as a servant, should be a minister of the law that condemns, but that I as Son and God should free the whole world from the curse of the law and, by exceedingness of lovingkindness, should heal the infirmity of the world. If then the grace that justifieth is better than the commandment that condemneth, how is it not meet to conceive that He surpasseth the measure of the servant Who introduceth so God-befitting authority, and releaseth man from the bonds of sin?

This then is one aim of the passage under consideration, and no mean one. A second besides this, revolving through the same circuit, and introducing a consideration akin to those above, will be given from love of learning. The Saviour saw that Nicodemus was cleaving to the law of Moses, and was fast held to the more ancient commandment, and was somehow startled at the new Birth through the Spirit, shrinking from the new and Gospel polity, supposing it seems that this would be more burdensome than the things already enjoined. Being therefore not ignorant, as God, of the fear which from his ignorance had sprung upon him, by using one short argument, He frees him from all trouble on this score, and shows that the commandment of Moses, by reason of its condemning the world, is harder to be borne, and introduces Himself as a mild Judge, saying, For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

For there are two Advents of Christ, that which has been, and that which is to be; and the two are not for the same purpose; the first came to pass not that He might search into our actions, but that He might remit; the object of the second will be not to remit, but to enquire. Therefore of the first He saith, "I came not to condemn the world, but to save the world"; but of the second, "When the Son shall have come in the glory of His Father, He shall set the sheep on His right hand, and the goats on His left." And they shall go, these into life; and these into eternal punishment. Yet His former coming was for judgment, according to the rule of justice. Why? Because before His coming there was a law of nature, and the prophets, and moreover a written Law, and doctrine, and ten thousand promises, and manifestations of signs, and chastisements, and vengeances, and many other things which might have set men right, and it followed that for all these things He would demand account; but, because He is merciful, He for a while pardons instead of making enquiry. For had He done so, all would at once have been hurried to perdition. For "all," it saith, "have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Seest thou the unspeakable excess of His lovingkindness?

Yet if He "came not to judge the world," how is "he that believeth not judged already," if the time of "judgment" has not yet arrived? He either means this, that the very fact of disbelieving without repentance is a punishment, (for to be without the light, contains in itself a very severe punishment,) or he announces beforehand what shall be. For as the murderer, though he be not as yet condemned by the decision of the judge, is still condemned by the nature of the thing, so is it with the unbeliever. Since Adam also died on the day that he ate of the tree; for so ran the decree, "In the day that ye eat of the tree, ye shall die"; yet he lived. How then "died" he? By the decree; by the very nature of the thing; for he who has rendered himself liable to punishment, is under its penalty, and if for a while not actually so, yet he is by the sentence.

Lest any one on hearing, "I came not to judge the world," should imagine that he might sin unpunished, and should so become more careless, Christ stops such disregard by saying, "is judged already"; and because the "judgment" was future and not yet at hand, He brings near the dread of vengeance, and describes the punishment as already come. And this is itself a mark of great lovingkindness, that He not only gives His Son, but even delays the time of judgment, that they who have sinned, and they who believe not, may have power to wash away their transgressions.

He that believeth on Him is not condemned; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God." Moreover, when John (the Baptist) was asked what he happened to know of Jesus, he said: "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hand.

Since there are two comings of Christ, one that has already taken place and another that is future, concerning the first coming he says that the Son was not sent to judge the world (for if He had come for this purpose, all would have been condemned, since all have sinned, as Paul also says (Rom. 3:23)), but He came primarily to save the world. Such was His purpose. But in practice, it turned out that He condemns those who did not believe. The Law of Moses came primarily for the exposure of sin (Rom. 3:20) and the condemnation of transgressors. For it pardoned no one, but as soon as it found someone sinning in anything, it immediately imposed punishment as well. Thus, the first coming did not have as its purpose to judge, except for those who in practice did not believe, for they are already condemned; but the second coming will be expressly for the purpose of judging all and rendering to each according to his deeds.

Here the Lord excludes an objection that might be made. For in the old law it was promised that the Lord would come to judge: "The Lord will come to judge" (Is 3:14). So someone might say that the Son of God had not come to give eternal life but in order to judge the world. The Lord rejects this. First, he shows that he has not come to judge. Secondly, he proves it (v 18).

So he says: The Son of God has not come to judge, because God did not send his Son, referring to his first coming, into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him. The same thing is found below (12:47): "I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world."

Now man's salvation is to attain to God: "My salvation is in God" (Ps 61:8). And to attain to God is to obtain eternal life; hence to be saved is the same as to have eternal life. However, because the Lord says, "I did not come to judge the world," men should not be lazy or abuse God's mercy, or give themselves over to sin: because although in his first coming he did not come to judge but to forgive, yet in his second coming, as Chrysostom says, he will come to judge but not to forgive. "At the appointed time I will judge with rigor" (Ps 74:3).

However, this seems to conflict with what is said below (9:39): "I came into this world to judge." I answer that there are two kinds of judgment. One is the judgment of distinction, and the Son has come for this in his first coming; because with his coming men are distinguished, some by blindness and some by the light of grace. The other is the judgment of condemnation; and he did not come for this as such.

The teaching of the law is good, and Christ does not criticize it, but he says, "If you would enter life, keep the commandments," indicating the beginning of this route but not its completion. Through this he shows that the law is not alien to himself, but perfection comes from himself.

The Lord said to a certain young man, "If you would enter life, keep the commandments." He did not say "If you would have life" but "If you would enter life," defining that life as eternal life. Let us first consider then the love of this life. For this life is loved, whatever its quality; and however troubled it is, however wretched, people are afraid to end it. Hence we should see, we should consider, how much eternal life is to be loved, when this miserable life that must at some time be ended is so loved. Consider, brothers, how much that life is to be loved when it is a life you never end. You love this life, where you work so much, run, are busy, pant. In this busy life the obligations can scarcely be counted: sowing, plowing, working new land, sailing, grinding, cooking, weaving. And after all this hard work your life comes to an end. Look at what you suffer in this wretched life that you so love. And do you think that you will always live and never die? Temples, rocks, marbles, all reinforced by iron and lead, still fall. And a person thinks that he will never die? Learn therefore, brothers, to seek eternal life, when you will not endure these things but will reign with God forever.

(de Cons. Ev. ii. 63.) This may seem a discrepancy, that Matthew here gives it, Why askest thou me concerning good? whereas Mark and Luke have, Why callest thou me good? For this, Why askest thou me concerning good? may seem rather to be referred to his question, What good thing shall I do? for in that he both mentioned good, and asked a question. But this, Good Master, is not yet a question. Either sentence may be understood thus very appropriately to the passage.

(de Trin. i. 13.) Or, because he sought eternal life, (and eternal life consists in such contemplation in which God is beheld not for punishment, but for everlasting joy,) and knew not with whom he spake, but thought Him only a Son of Man, therefore He says, Why askest thou me concerning good, calling me in respect of what you see in me, Good Master? This form of the Son of Man shall appear in the judgment, not to the righteous only, but to the wicked, and the very sight shall be to them an evil, and their punishment. But there is a sight of My form, in which I am equal to God. That one God therefore, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is alone good, because none see Him to mourning and sorrow, but only to salvation and true joy.

(Serm. 84, 1.) And He said not, If thou desirest life eternal; but, If thou wilt enter into life, calling that simply life, which shall be everlasting. Here we should consider how eternal life should be loved, when this miserable and finite life is so loved.

"If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." These words are the words of our Savior, in which the sum of our whole salvation is set forth for us with respect to two things: first, with respect to the reward of eternal retribution; there: "If you wish to enter into life": second, with respect to the merit of human action, there: "keep the commandments." And this is the right order, because the end moves the agent to apply himself toward the due end.

Let us therefore follow the form of this great Master; and before we say anything about these precepts, let us first speak about the observance of the precepts.

The Lord sets forth first the motive, then adds the act by which we can arrive at the due end. And it should be noted that there are four things which move us to observe the commandments of God. The first is the authority or dignity of the one commanding: the second is the utility of observance: the third is the peril of transgression: the fourth is the irreproachability of the commandments. Since therefore He who commands the precepts to be observed is of great authority, and the observance of the commandments is of great utility, and in transgression great peril consists, and the commandment is irreproachable: therefore there is no one who can have an excuse regarding the observance of the commandments.

From the first consideration comes forth the first act, that is, doing good, under the guidance of the commandments. "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." Indeed this consideration of God's commandments leads to good deeds. The command of the Lord is right in itself, for righteousness is nothing else than rectitude. Within the law, rectitude exists through itself; in the one observing the law, rectitude exists through participation. It is fitting, therefore, to consider, accept, and love God's commandments. If Adam and Eve had done it, they would not have fallen. In this way you will be transformed through love.

Scripture enlightens a priori by means of directive precepts. It is fitting to have light before oneself. For the bidding is a lamp, and the teaching a light; and this leads to heaven. Hence, "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." And to the commandments are added the counsels. And this is what Scripture teaches us everywhere.

The first mode first and principally fixes its gaze upon being itself, saying that He Who Is is the primary name of God. The second mode fixes its gaze upon the good itself, saying that this is the primary name of God. The first pertains especially to the Old Testament, which above all proclaims the unity of the divine essence; whence it was said to Moses: I am who I am; the second pertains to the New, which determines the plurality of persons, baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Therefore our master Christ, wishing to raise the young man who had kept the Law to evangelical perfection, principally and precisely attributed the name of goodness to God. No one, he said, is good but God alone. Damascene therefore, following Moses, says that He Who Is is the primary name of God; Dionysius, following Christ, says that the good is the primary name of God.

(Verse 17) Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one good God. Because he had called a good teacher, and not God, or the Son of God, he learns that even a holy man is not good in comparison to God, of whom it is said: Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good (Psalm 117:1). But lest anyone think that the goodness of God excludes the Son of God, we read in another place: The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep (John 10). And in the Prophet, the good Spirit and the good earth. Therefore, the Savior did not reject the testimony of goodness. But the teacher eliminated error without God.

But because he had styled Him Good Master, and had not confessed Him as God, or as the Son of God, He tells him, that in comparison of God there is no saint to be called good, of whom it is said, Confess unto the Lord, for he is good; (Ps. 118:1.) and therefore He says, There is one good, that is, God. But that none should suppose that by this the Son of God is excluded from being good, we read in another place, The good Shepherd layeth down his life for his sheep. (John 10:11.)

For Our Saviour does not reject this witness to His goodness, but corrected the error of calling Him Good Master apart from God.

Wherefore then doth Christ thus reply to him, saying, "There is none good?" Because He came unto Him as a mere man, and one of the common sort, and a Jewish teacher; for this cause then as a man He discourses with him. And indeed in many instances He replies to the secret thoughts of them that come unto Him; as when He saith, "We worship we know what;" and, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true." When therefore He saith, "There is none good;" not as putting Himself out from being good doth He say this, far from it; for he said not, "Why dost thou call me good? I am not good;" but, "there is none good," that is, none amongst men.

And when He saith this self-same thing, He saith it not as depriving even men of goodness, but in contradistinction to the goodness of God. Wherefore also He added, "But one, that is, God;" and He said not, "but my Father" that thou mightest learn that He had not revealed Himself to the young man. So also further back He called men evil, saying, "If ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children." For indeed there too He called them evil, not as condemning the whole race as evil (for by "ye," He means not "ye men"), but comparing the goodness that is in men with the goodness of God, He thus named it; therefore also He added, "How much more shall your Father give good things to them that ask Him?" And what was there to urge Him, or what the profit that He should answer in this way? He leads him on by little and little, and teaches him to be far from all flattery, drawing him off from the things upon each, and fastening him upon God, and persuading him to seek after the things to come, and to know that which is really good, and the root and fountain of all things, and to refer the honors to Him.

Christ also answers thus, because of that He said, What good thing shall I do? For when we depart from evil and do good, that which we do is called good by comparison with what other men do. But when compared with absolute good, in the sense in which it is here said, There is one good, our good is not good. But some one may say, that because the Lord knew that the purpose of him who thus asked Him was not even to do such good as man can do, that therefore He said, Why askest thou me concerning good? as much as to say, Why do you ask me concerning good, seeing you are not prepared to do what is good. But after this He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Where note, that He speaks to him as yet standing without life; for that man is in one sense without life, who is without Him who said, I am the life. Otherwise, every man upon earth may be, not in life itself, but only in its shadow, while he is clad in a body of death. But any man shall enter into life, if he keep himself from dead works, and seek living works. But there are dead words and living words, also dead thoughts and living thoughts, and therefore He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Or perhaps these precepts are enough to introduce one, if I may say so, to the entrance of life; but neither these, nor any like them, are enough to conduct one to the more inward parts of life. But whoso transgresses one of these commandments, shall not even come to the entrance in unto life.

These words prove that the Law gave to such as kept it not only temporal promises, but also life eternal. And because the hearing these things made him thoughtful, He saith unto him, Which?

"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.

That is why the Lord says, "Why callest thou Me good? There is none good but One, that is, God." This means, if you call Me good thinking I am one of the teachers, you speak wrongly, for no man is essentially good; both because we are changeable and easily turned away from good, and because, by comparison with God's goodness, human goodness is counted as wickedness.

But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto Him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother, and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The Lord directs the enquirer to the commandments of the law, so that the Jews could not say that He despised the law.

Who said to him: why do you ask me? Here he presents the response. First he responds, as is found in Mark, why do you call me good? But here, why do you ask me? Both can be understood. But what Matthew says, why do you ask me? has no difficulty; but according to what Mark says, the Arians adopted the error, saying that the Father is good by essence, the Son by participation; therefore they held the Son to be unequal to the Father. But it should be noted that he says: one is good, God. But by the name of God is understood the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit: hence from this every other creature is excluded, because it is not good by essence. But why does he respond in this way? Jerome says that he responds to the man's mind, who was commending that goodness which is customary in a man; because they adhered more to the traditions of men than of God, as is said above at 15:6: you have made void the commandment of God for your traditions. Therefore he rebukes him, because he was asking of him as of a good man, and not as of God. But what is it that he says, why do you ask me about the good? He says this as knowing his disposition, because he did not have the mind to obey the good, and every temporal good is imperfect and a shadow in comparison with the divine good; Isaiah 64:6: all our justices are as the rag of a menstruous woman. Hence all these goods are from God; therefore if you wish to have them, ask of him: for he alone is good; Psalm 135:1: praise the Lord, for he is good. Therefore have recourse to God. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments. For some have imperfect life, some perfect life, and some are totally outside of life, as those who are in sin, or unbelievers, because the just man lives by faith (Heb 10:38). Some therefore have an incipient and imperfect life, as the just in this world; but those have a perfect life who are already in eternal life; hence if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments, because man is led in through the commandments. Ezekiel 20:11: I gave them my commandments and showed them my judgments. But were the commandments sufficient for salvation? I say no, except through faith in the mediator and through charity; hence the Apostle in Galatians 2:21: if justice be by the law, then Christ died in vain. Likewise Proverbs 7:2: keep my commandments, and you shall live.

When Christ says to him, "If you would enter life, keep the commandments," the man expects him to add immediately, "my commandments." "Which ones?" he asks. He was quite deceived in his expectation. For Christ did not answer him as he expected but simply pointed him to the law. This is not because the law is perfection, for "no one is justified by the law," as it is written, but because the life lived according to law is a kind of introduction to the eternal life, briefly acquainting trainees to the things above. "For the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ." The law is the starting point for social justice. Christ is the perfection. For the beginning of good is to act justly, he says. Just action then is shown by the law, but goodness is shown by Christ. The law taught us to repay those who wish to harm us, as in "eye for eye, tooth for tooth." But Christ taught us to let go such balanced vengeance with a view to the greater good, teaching that "if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if anyone would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well."

This young man has grown impudent from studying the law. He is worried about his salvation. Jesus sends him back to the law so that he might understand that, in the very thing in which he takes pride, he has as yet done no righteous work. For the Lord answered him with the words of the law. But the young man, like the boastful and impudent people of whom he is a type, put his trust in the law, but he did not really comply with it at all. For they had been ordered not to kill, yet they had killed the prophets. They knew they were not to commit adultery, yet they had brought corruption on the faith and adultery on the law and had worshiped other gods. They knew not to steal, yet by stealth they had dissolved the commandments of the law, before Christ restored the freedom of believing in the faith. They knew not to bear false witness, yet they denied that Christ rose from the dead. They were ordered to honor father and mother, yet they had separated themselves from the family of God the Father and their mother the church. They were ordered to love their neighbor as themselves, yet they persecuted Christ, who had assumed the body of us all and had become neighbor to each one of us by the condition of the assumed body; they persecuted him to the punishment of the cross. So the young man was ordered to cast off and cut out all these vices and to return to the law.

(Verse 18, 19.) But if you want to enter life, keep the commandments. He said to him, 'Which ones?' Jesus replied, 'You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not give false testimony. Honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.' This young man is tempting, and from this we can prove that when the Lord tells him, 'If you want to enter life, keep the commandments,' he deceitfully asks what those commandments are: as if he himself had not read them, or as if the Lord could command something contrary to God.

Therefore when Christ said, "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments," he saith, "Which?" Not tempting, far from it, but supposing there were some others besides those of the law that should procure him life, which was like one who was very desirous.

These commandments are sufficient for someone entering on the ground level of the path of eternal life. But they are not sufficient to lead one to the higher life, and certainly not to perfection. One who fails in just one of these commandments cannot even enter the beginnings of life. Anyone who wishes to enter the early stages of the path of life must be free from adultery and murder and any kind of theft. For just as the adulterer and murderer will not enter into life, so neither will the thief. Many of those who are said to believe in Christ are guilty of this sin. Just look at their daily business and the way money is entrusted to them and the crafts they practice.

And Jesus, condescending as to a weak one, most graciously set out to him the precepts of the Law; Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder; and of all these precepts follows the exposition, And thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. For the Apostle says, Whoso loveth his neighbour has fulfilled the Law? (Prov. 13:10.) But it should be enquired, why the Lord has enumerated only the precepts of the Second Table? Perhaps because this young man was zealous in the love of God, or because love of our neighbour is the step by which we ascend to the love of God.

He said to him: which? There follows the exposition of the response, in which he recounts the commandments. And first he sets forth the commandments; secondly the root, at you shall love your neighbor as yourself. He says therefore Jesus said: you shall not kill etc. And why does he not mention the commandments of the first table? Because he saw him inclined to the love of God; therefore it was not necessary. Likewise these are preliminary to love. And first he sets forth the negative; secondly the affirmative. First he begins from the greater: you shall not kill, which is against life in act; you shall not commit adultery, which is against life in potency; you shall not steal, which is against the goods of the person; you shall not bear false witness, which is against the person.

Are we to paint ourselves out that our neighbours may perish? Where, then, is (the command), "Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself? " "Care not merely about your own (things), but (about your) neighbour's? " No enunciation of the Holy Spirit ought to be (confined) to the subject immediately in hand merely, and not applied and carried out with a view to every occasion to which its application is useful.

Likewise he sets forth the affirmative: honor your father. Then he sets forth the root: you shall love your neighbor as yourself. Romans 13:8: he that loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.

The rich young man claimed to have kept the commandments. Then he heard the greater commandment: "If you wish to be perfect, you still lack one thing: sell all that you have and give it to the poor"; you will not lose it, but "you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." What good does it do you if you follow the law and do not follow me? He went away sad and sorrowful, as you have heard, for he had great wealth.What he heard, we too have heard. The Word of Christ is the gospel. He sits in heaven, but he does not cease to speak on earth. Let us not be deaf, for he shouts. Let us not be dead, for he thunders. If you are not willing to do the greater commandments, do the lesser ones. If the burden of the greater is too much for you, take up the lesser. Why are you slow to do either? Why do you oppose both? The greater commandments are "Sell everything that you have and give to the poor and follow me." The lesser are "You shall not commit murder; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not bear false witness; you shall not steal; honor your father and mother; love your neighbor as yourself." So do these things. Why do I shout to you that you must sell your possessions when I cannot get you to admit that you should not take someone else's? You have heard, "You shall not steal." You rob. Before the eyes of so great a judge, I now hold you not a thief but a robber. Spare yourself; pity yourself. This life still gives you time. Don't reject reproof. Yesterday you were a thief; do not also be one today. Perhaps you have also been one today? Do not be one tomorrow. Sometime end your sin and expect good reward. You want to have your goods, but you are unwilling to be good. Your life is contrary to your hopes. If it is a great good to have a good house, how great an evil is it to have an evil soul?

(de. Op. Monach. 25.) Nor need it be made a scruple in what monasteries, or to the indigent brethren of what place, any one gives those things that he has, for there is but one commonwealth of all Christians. Therefore wheresoever any Christian has laid out his goods, in all places alike he shall receive what is necessary for himself, shall receive it of that which is Christ's.

(cont. Faust. v. 9.) Nor are such only partakers in the kingdom of heaven, who, to the end they may be perfect, sell or part with all that they have; but in these Christian ranks are numbered by reason of a certain communication of their charity a multitude of hired troops; those to whom it shall be said in the end, I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; (Mat. 25:35.) whom be it far from us to consider excluded from life eternal, as they who obey not the commands of the Gospel.

Fear causes one to withdraw from evil and from the occasion of evil; and because the root of all evils is cupidity, therefore fear disposes to poverty of spirit, in which humility is joined together with poverty, so that the perfect man may thus be distanced from the fount of all fault, namely from pride and cupidity. And hence it is that poverty of spirit is the foundation of all evangelical perfection. Whence he who wishes to come to the summit of perfection must first lay this foundation, according to that passage in Matthew nineteen: If you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have: behold, perfect poverty, which retains absolutely nothing for itself: and follow me: behold, humility, which causes a man, by denying himself, to take up his cross and follow Christ, who is the most principal foundation of all perfection.

Matthew 19, where it is said: If you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have, and give to the poor, and come follow me; The Gloss: "Behold, the contemplative life, which pertains to the Gospel." It is certain that the Lord was not calling him to riches, and yet was counseling him to renounce all things: nor to manual labor, but rather to the contemplative life, as the Gloss says: therefore etc.

Ambrose, in the book On Duties, near the beginning, where he says thus: "Every duty is either ordinary or perfect; which we can prove by the authority of the Scriptures. For we have in the Gospel: If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments. You shall not kill, etc. These are ordinary duties, in which something is lacking. If you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have, and give to the poor, and where he says that enemies are to be loved and prayer is to be made for those who slander and persecute us, if we wish to be perfect. This is the perfect duty, which the Greeks called catorthoma, by which all things that could have had any failings are corrected." Generosity, therefore, which is considered according to the middle duty, preserves moderation in giving. Poverty of spirit, however, which is considered according to the perfect duty, bestows all.

To the objection that to beg is indifferent: it must be said that to beg, in itself, is not a matter of perfection unless a universal renunciation of all things is presupposed; which indeed is according to divine counsel, in which the Lord expressed to the young man that if he fulfilled that counsel, by that very fact he would arrive at the summit of perfection. For He said: If you wish to be perfect, go and sell all things: nor did He add: hand them over to me, that I may put them in my purse, and let all things be held in common; but rather: give to the poor; nor did He subjoin: go to earn your sustenance by the labor of your hands; but rather: come, follow me. In which, according to what the Gloss expounds, is understood a calling to contemplation, or to imitating Christ and preaching the Gospel.

(Gennadius, de Eccles. Dogm. 36.) It is good to distribute with discrimination to the poor; it is better, with resolve of following the Lord, to strip one's self of all at once, and freed from anxiety to suffer want with Christ.

It is in our power whether we wish to be perfect. Yet whoever wishes to be perfect ought to sell what he has—and not sell them in part, as Ananias did and Sapphira, but to sell it all. When he has sold it to give it all to the poor, he has begun to 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, abandons evil and does good. For more easily is a little purse despised than one's will. Many abandon their wealth but do not follow the Savior. To follow the Savior is to be an imitator of him and walk in his steps. Anyone who says that he believes in Christ must himself also walk in the steps he walked in.

(Verse 21.) If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me. It is in our power to choose to be perfect. However, whoever wishes to be perfect must sell what they have: and not sell only a portion, as Ananias and Sapphira did (Act. V); but sell everything: and when they have sold, give everything to the poor, and thus prepare for themselves treasure in the kingdom of heaven. And this is not enough for perfection unless one follows the Savior after despising riches, that is, by leaving behind evils and doing good. For it is easier to despise a purse than pleasure. Many who leave behind riches do not follow the Lord. But he who is an imitator of the Lord follows him and walks in his footsteps. For whoever says that they believe in Christ should walk as he walked (1 John 2:6).

(cont. Vigilant. 15.) That Vigilantius asserts that they who retain the use of their property, and from time to time divide their incomes among the poor, do better than they who sell their possessions and lavish them in one act of charity, to him, not I, but God shall make answer, If thou wilt be perfect, Go and sell. That which you so extol, is but the second or third grade; which we indeed admit, only remembering that what is first is to be set before what is third or second.

For many who leave their riches do not therefore follow the Lord; and it is not sufficient for perfection that they despise money, unless they also follow the Saviour, that unless having forsaken evil, they also do what is good. For it is easier to contemn the hoard than quit the propensityb; therefore it follows, And come and follow me; for he follows the Lord who is his imitator, and who walks in his steps.

What then saith Christ? Since He was going to enjoin something great, He setteth forth the recompenses, and saith, "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven: and come, and follow me."

Seest thou how many prizes, how many crowns, He appoints for this race? If he had been tempting, He would not have told him these things. But now He both saith it, and in order to draw him on, He also shows him the reward to be great, and leaves it all to his own will, by all means throwing into the shade that which seemed to be grievous in His advice. Wherefore even before mentioning the conflicts and the toil, He shows him the prize, saying "If thou wilt be perfect," and then saith, "Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor," and straightway again the rewards, "Thou shalt have treasure in Heaven; and come, and follow me." For indeed to follow Him is a great recompense. "And thou shalt have treasure in Heaven."

For since his discourse was of money, even of all did He advise him to strip himself, showing that he loses not what he hath, but adds to his possessions, He gave him more than He required him to give up; and not only more, but also as much greater as Heaven is greater than earth, and yet more so.

But He called it a treasure, showing the plenteousness of the recompense, its permanency, its security, so far as it was possible by human similitudes to intimate it to the hearer. It is not then enough to despise wealth, but we must also maintain poor men, and above all things follow Christ; that is, do all the things that are ordered by Him, be ready for slaughter and daily death. "For if any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me." So that to cast away one's money is a much less thing than this last commandment, to shed even one's very blood; yet not a little doth our being freed from wealth contribute towards this.

Seest thou how far the praises of poverty have proceeded, and where it places thee, to what men it leads thee on, and how it makes thee a follower of the Lord? If it were good to have gold, Christ, who have the unutterable blessings, would have given this to His disciples. But now so far from giving it them, He forbad them to have it. Wherefore Peter also, so far from being ashamed of poverty, even glories in it, saying, "Silver and gold have I none; but what I have give I thee." And who of you would not have desired to utter this saying? Nay, we all would extremely, perhaps some one may say. Then throw away thy silver, throw away thy gold. "And if I throw it away, thou wilt say, shall I receive the power of Peter?" Why, what made Peter blessed, tell me? Was it indeed to have lifted up the lame man? By no means, but the not having these riches, this procured him Heaven. For of those that wrought these miracles, many fell into hell, but they, who did those good things, attained a kingdom. And this you may learn even of Peter himself. For there were two things that he said, "Silver and gold have I none;" and, "In the name of Jesus Christ rise up and walk."

Which sort of thing then made Him glorious and blessed, the raising up the lame man, or the casting away his money? And this you may learn from the Master of the conflicts Himself. What then doth He Himself say to the rich man seeking eternal life? He said not, "raise up the lame," but, "Sell thy goods, and give to the poor, and come and follow me, and thou shall have treasure in Heaven."

One might inquire , since he is perfect who has all the virtues and no longer practices connected to vice, how it is that he might become perfect who sells his own substance and gives it to the poor. For should you present someone having done this, how might he become anger-free as a consequence, if he be easily susceptible to anger? How without grief, and better able to endure all such things which are able evoke grief? How will he be beyond all fear, of that which concerns trials, or of death, or of those things such as are able to bring fear to the as-yet unperfected soul? Will the person who gives away [his] substance in such a fashion, and gives to the poor, be free from all desire? For one might say that the ability to give away all one's substance by itself could produce a certain kind of human suffering from poverty leading one to, on the one hand, repent of having done such a daring thing, and on the other to desire possessions equivalent [to that which was given away]. And if indeed that which is called pleasure, being an irrational impulse of the soul, is a passion, how might one give away all substance and give to the poor at one time, and at the same time be released from being impelled irrationally? Someone may also add a question, as to how one is able by having given away one's substance and given to the poor to become wise the wisdom of God, so as to offer a reason to each one who asks concerning the faith that is in him (cf. 1 Pet 3.15), concerning each of those things which have been believed, and concerning those things spoken in a hidden fashion in the holy Scriptures? Take note that this line of questioning is truly genuine and not easily resolved. For were we to say that someone has become perfect through this [act] alone, even if he be not connected to the things we have outlined [above], we would be confronted by a paradox in saying that someone is at the same time perfect and a sinner (for the irascible man is a sinner, as is the one who grieves the grief of the world, and the one who fears tribulations or death, and desires things that are absent, and irrationally impels the soul to things that are not good as though they were good). At the same time, were we to say that someone, by selling a substance and giving it to the poor, assumes all the virtues even becoming inspired of God, as it were, and puts away all vice from himself, we would be speaking with credulity (if I may speak in a more common manner), but I do not know if truly. Perhaps indeed those who hear this explanation for the difficulty raised will mock us, as though we speak without prudence.

Someone, who keeps to the letter and in no way offers a figurative reading of the [contents] of the passage, might seem more prudently, offering a rejoinder in this way, as though credulous, but if the things said are worthy or not of the thoughts according to the passage, indeed you yourself will judge. One may say therefore that, since he who distributes to the poor is assisted by their prayer for his own salvation, receiving for his own lack an abundance of spiritual things from those who are lacking bodily things (as the Apostle indicated in the second [letter] to the Corinthians), might it be that someone else could experience the same thing and be assisted greatly by it, with God hearkening unto the prayers of those who have found rest in such poverty—[that] among such people there may perhaps be those who are similar to the Apostles though a little inferior to them, people who are poor in bodily things, as were [the Apostles], but who are wealthy in spiritual things? This person then who accepts poverty in exchange for wealth for the sake of becoming perfect (having been persuaded by the words of Jesus) might be assisted quickly, as indeed the Apostles of Christ [were], so as to become wise in Christ, and courageous, and righteous, and modest, and free of all passion. One who defends such an [interpretation] may say that one need not suppose that this [perfection] happened to him on the same day he sold [his] substance and gave [it] to the poor, but perhaps from that day God's providential care would begin to direct him to such things, what I would call the praiseworthy impassibility and every virtue. Advancing as did Isaac on account of the assistance from God given him in Christ, he will become "greater, until such time as" he has increased "greatly," he may become "exceedingly abundant" in every virtue (cf. Gen 26.13), with every shred of vice having been destroyed from his soul. And the person who would offer this explanation is not constrained to say that the man becomes perfect by this [act] itself, namely that he gave his substance over to the poor, while sinning in other matters.

If every commandment is fulfilled in this one word, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, and if he is perfect who has fulfilled every command, how is it that the Lord said to the young man, If thou wilt be perfect, when he had declared, All these have I kept from my youth up. Perhaps that he says, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, was not said by the Lord, but added by some one, for neither Mark nor Luke have given it in this place. Or otherwise; It is written in the Gospela according to the Hebrews, that, when the Lord said, Go, and sell all that thou hast, the rich man began to scratch his head, being displeased with the saying. Then the Lord said unto him, How sayest thou, I have kept the Law, and the Prophets, since it is written in the Law, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself? For how many of thy brethren sons of Abraham, clothed in filth, perish for hunger? Thy house is full of many good things, and nothing goes thereout to them. The Lord then, desiring to convict this rich man, says to him, If thou will be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor; for so it will be seen if thou dost indeed love thy neighbour as thyself. But if he is perfect who has all the virtues, how does he become perfect who sells all that he has and gives to the poor? For suppose one to have done this, will he thereby become forthwith free from anger, desire, having every virtue, and abandoning all vice? Perhaps wisdom may suggest, that he that has given his goods to the poor, is aided by their prayers, receiving of their spiritual abundance to his want, and is made in this way perfect, though he may have some human passions. Or thus; He that thus exchanged his riches for poverty, in order that he might become perfect, shall have assistance to become wise in Christ, just, chaste also, and devoid of all passion; but not so as that in the moment when he gave up all his goods, he should forthwith become perfect; but only that from that day forward the contemplation of God will begin to bring him to all virtues. Or again, it will pass into a moral exposition, and say, that the possessions of a man are the acts of his mind. Christ then bids a man to sell all his evil possessions, and as it were to give them over to the virtues which should work the same, which were poor in all that is good. For as the peace of the Apostles returns to them again, (Mat. 10:13.) unless there be a son of peace, so all sins return upon their actors, when one will no longer indulge his evil propensities; and thus there can be no doubt that he will straightway become perfect who in this sense sells all his possessions. It is manifest that he that does these things, has treasure in heaven, and is himself become of heaven; and he will have in heaven treasure of God's glory, and riches in all God's wisdom. Such an one will be able to follow Christ, for he has no evil possession to draw him off from so following

And after He had laid down these limitations for us, and had explained unto us the various grades in the righteousness of the just, Jesus continued in His speech to teach us perfection, and said unto that learned man who asked Him, that is to say, in teaching him He taught all His disciples, "If thou wishest to be perfect, go, sell all thy possessions, and give them to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven." And here even we have not as yet begun to walk in the path of righteousness, for that a man should take up his cross and go forth after Jesus is one rule of life, for as the dwelling in the womb is one thing, and the going forth of the child from the belly is another, and the existence of a man in the world, after being born from the womb, is another. Even so the righteousness which is in the world is like unto the substance of the child within the womb, and the commandment, "Go and sell all thy possessions, and give to the poor, and there shall be treasure for thee in heaven," is the belly from which is born out of the old womb the new creation, and it is that door through which he goeth forth from one world to the other; but that commandment, "Take up thy cross and come after Me," belongs to the perfect rule and conduct, and it is the path of spiritual life.

Now the reward hath Jesus set in the midst between the righteous and the perfect, "Go, sell thy possessions, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven"; behold the reward for righteousness! And He calleth this reward "treasure," because the men who hasten after the righteousness of the world do good works on the condition that there is a reward, and well did Jesus in His words place the treasure at the end of the way of the righteousness which is in the world, that their wages being set before them they may run direct to where they are, even as do those who contend in a game, and before whom is set the crown which will make them to gain the victory. Into the land of the perfect our Lord did not make a reward to enter, because it would be a disgrace unto the perfect to labour in the rule of the spirit for wages; for behold the spiritual mindedness in which the perfect stand is the wages of the just and righteous, because they have wrought good things in the world on the condition that they should be changed and become spiritual beings, and be freed from all the carnal mindedness, and the passions, and the subjection of the world.

See two kinds of life which we have heard set before men; the Active, to which pertains, Thou shalt not kill, and the rest of the Law; and the Contemplative, to which pertains this, If thou wilt be perfect. The active pertains to the Law, the contemplative to the Gospel; for as the Old Testament went before the New, so good action goes before contemplation.

But to those who would be perfect in grace, He shows how they may come to perfection, Jesus saith unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go, and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor. Mark the words; He said not, Go, and consume all thou hast; but Go, and sell; and not some, as did Ananias and Sapphira, but All. And well He added, that thou hast, for what we have are our lawful possessions. Those therefore that he justly possessed were to be sold; what had been gained unjustly were to be restored to those from whom they had been taken. And He said not, Give to thy neighbours, nor to the rich, but to the poor.

"My work was my subsistence." Nay, but "all things are to be sold, and divided to the needy." "But provision must be made for children and posterity.

Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect go and sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow Me. But when the man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. Everything, He says, which you say you have accomplished, you have done by fulfilling only the letter of the law, as do the Jews. But if you would be perfect, that is, be My disciple and a Christian, go and sell all that you have, and give everything all at once, keeping nothing back with which to give alms continuously. For He did not say, "give repeatedly to the poor," but "give" once and for all and be stripped of your wealth. But since there are some who give alms but who lead a life full of every kind of filth, He adds, "and come and follow Me," that is, possess every other virtue as well. The young man, however, was sorrowful, for though he desired eternal life, and the soil of his heart was deep and fertile, yet the thorns of wealth were choking him. For it says, "he had great possessions." He who has few possessions is not similarly restrained by them, for the bond of many possessions is more tyrannical. Because the Lord was conversing with a rich man, He said, "Do you love wealth? Know that you will have treasure in heaven."

Jesus said to him: if you wish to be perfect, go etc. First the pursuit is presented; secondly the way; thirdly, because it is difficult, the reward is presented; fourthly the consummation of perfection. He says therefore if you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have, and give to the poor. For we ought to strive toward perfection; Hebrews 6:1: leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on to things more perfect. But Origen asks: the perfection of the law is love; but he had said you shall love your neighbor as yourself; why then did he say if you wish to be perfect, since he was already perfect? Some say that in certain manuscripts that passage you shall love your neighbor as yourself is not included. And this is clear, because in Mark it is not included. Otherwise it can be said that he said it, but not in this order, because in the Gospel of the Nazarenes it is thus: the Lord said, you shall not kill etc., up to the passage about love. And afterwards follows, all these etc., and then follows, you shall love your neighbor etc. Nevertheless the solution is clear, because love of neighbor is twofold, namely love according to the common way, and love of perfection. Hence he says go and sell all etc., not a part, as Ananias and Sapphira did, as is found in Acts 5:2. And give to the poor, not to the rich. 1 Corinthians 13:3: if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor. Psalm 111:9: he has distributed, he has given to the poor. And not to one, but to many. But what of this? Would he not immediately be perfect? It seems not, because passions are still in him; therefore he is not perfect in virtue. Origen says that he is immediately perfect, just as those are perfect to whom he distributed his goods. 2 Corinthians 8:14: let your abundance supply their want, and let their abundance be a supplement to your want. Hence the perfection of those passes into him, just as he that receives a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive the reward of a prophet etc., above at 10:41. Hence the way of perfection is not go and sell all that you have; but only what follows, and give to the poor. Another response is if you wish to be perfect, not that you would immediately be perfect, but you will have a certain beginning of perfection, because unburdened of these things, you will be able more easily to contemplate heavenly things. Augustine says that vigils and such things are instruments of perfection; but in what follows is perfection, and follow me. Hence above at 4:20: Peter and Andrew, leaving all things, followed him. And so also Matthew above at 9:9. But when you give up all these things, the better use is to give to the poor, and in this one's neighbor must be considered. Hence if perfection is not in these things, in what does it consist? It must be said that it consists in the perfection of charity; Colossians 3:14: above all things have charity, which is the bond of perfection. Hence the love of God is perfection, but the relinquishing of things is the way to perfection. And how? Augustine in the book of Eighty-three Questions says that the increase of charity is the diminishing of cupidity; the perfection of charity is no cupidity. Therefore he is perfect in charity who loves God even to the contempt of himself and his own. Hence it is difficult and practically impossible for anyone to possess riches without being enticed by them: and this is clear from Gregory, of whom it is read that when he thought he could better serve Christ in a secular guise, so many things began to spring up against him that he was held not only in appearance, but also in mind. Therefore nothing makes the spirit so free as not being occupied with riches: and this is the way of perfection. Hence it is one thing to be perfect, and another to have the state of perfection. Whoever has perfect charity even to the contempt of himself and his own possesses perfection. The state of perfection is twofold, that of prelates and of religious; but equivocally, because the state of religious is for acquiring perfection; hence to this man it was said: if you wish to be perfect, and if you wish to come to the state of perfection. But the state of prelacy is not for acquiring perfection for oneself, but for communicating what has been acquired: hence the Lord, in the last chapter of John (21:17), said to Peter: Peter, if you love me, feed my sheep; and he did not say if you wish to be perfect etc. Hence such is the difference between the perfection of religious and of prelates as between a student and a master. Hence to a student it is said: if you wish to learn, enter the schools to learn. To a master it is said: teach and bring to completion. Hence the state of the religious is more secure, because ignorance is not imputed to them as it is to a prelate. Hence just as it would be ridiculous for a master to know nothing, so etc. But granted that each does what pertains to him, and makes good use of his office, I say that there is no comparison except as between a student and a master: hence a prelate is in a more perfect state, even if you were to give Elijah or anyone whatsoever. But there is a question: if a prelate is perfect, is he not bound to sell all things? I say that this would follow if in the words go and sell all that you have there were perfection; but there is not, but it is the way and the preamble to acquiring perfection; therefore it is not necessary that he sell what he has. But because it rarely happens that one has perfection together with riches, by one who comes to perfection all things must be relinquished; therefore the Lord gives what is easier. Hence if a prelate were suitable and administered his charge well, I say that he would be more perfect; just as someone can say: I wish to enter the schools to learn, but it is presumptuous to say, when one knows nothing, that he wishes to be a master. Hence Augustine in the City of God: the higher office, without which the people cannot be governed, even if it is decently administered, is indecently sought. Likewise it is one thing to be a prelate and another to be in the state of a prelate. Are parish priests or pastors in the state of perfection? I say that they are not in the state, because they do not constitute a state. Every state is given with solemnity, as the order of the episcopate and religious life. But when a parish is given, it is not given with solemnity; hence they do not have the state of perfection: which is clear, because to some are committed care and administration, and if one has not been promoted, he can give it up and marry, and sometimes has become a religious. But a bishop would not give up the episcopate except with the permission of a superior; a pastor can do so by entering religious life. If, however, he were in a more perfect state, he would now fall from the state, and so would sin: hence he can have perfection according to act, but not the state; because no state is given except with solemnity. Go therefore and sell all that you have, and give to the poor, because through this you will have a great reward, because the reward corresponds to the merit. And you shall have treasure in heaven. In a treasure there are two things, stability and abundance. You shall have a treasure and an abundance of spiritual goods. Psalm 111:3: glory and riches are in his house. Isaiah 33:6: and faith shall be in your times, the riches of salvation, wisdom and knowledge. And come, follow me. Here is the end of perfection. Hence those are perfect who follow God with their whole heart. Hence Genesis 17:1: walk before me, and be perfect. And follow me, i.e., imitate the life of Christ; hence above at 16:24: if any man will come after me, let him deny himself. For imitation consists in the care of preaching, teaching, and having charge of souls. Hence Chrysostom says: it was said to Peter, follow me, namely in taking up the care of the whole world. Job 23:11: my foot has kept to his steps.

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.

One of the dangers of having a lot of money is that you may be quite satisfied with the kinds of happiness money can give and so fail to realise your need for God. If everything seems to come simply by signing cheques, you may forget that you are at every moment totally dependent on God. Now quite plainly, natural gifts carry with them a similar danger. If you have sound nerves and intelligence and health and popularity and a good upbringing, you are likely to be quite satisfied with your character as it is. 'Why drag God into it?' you may ask. A certain level of good conduct comes fairly easily to you. You are not one of those wretched creatures who are always being tripped up by sex, or dipsomania, or nervousness, or bad temper. Everyone says you are a nice chap and (between ourselves) you agree with them. You are quite likely to believe that all this niceness is your own doing: and you may easily not feel the need for any better kind of goodness. Often people who have all these natural kinds of goodness cannot be brought to recognise their need for Christ at all until, one day, the natural goodness lets them down and their self-satisfaction is shattered. In other words, it is hard for those who are 'rich' in this sense to enter the Kingdom.

"How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! And I say unto you, that it is easier for a camel to enter in through the eye of a needle, than a rich man into the kingdom of God." Now by a camel He means not the animal of that name, but a thick cable rather: for it is the custom of those well versed in navigation to call the thicker cables "camels."

Observe however, that He does not altogether cut away the hope of the rich, but reserves for them a place and way of salvation. For He did not say that it is impossible for a rich man to enter in, but that he does so with difficulty.

(ap. Anselm.) The Lord took occasion from this rich man to hold discourse concerning the covetous; Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, &c.

The arrogant young man, when told to make good his failure to obey the law, is downcast and sad. To the people of which he is a prototype, the cross and Passion are a stumbling block. There is no salvation for this young man there. But he glories in the law, despises the Gentiles and refuses to cross into the freedom of the gospel; therefore it will be difficult for him to enter the kingdom of heaven. For few of them—and compared with the multitude of the Gentiles they are very rare—were those Jews who would believe. It was difficult for them to bend their will, long hardened under the law, to the gospel's preaching of humility. But more easily will the camel pass through the eye of a needle. A camel cannot fit into the eye of a needle, nor can the bulk of the huge beast be received by the narrow mouth of the tiny hole. In the beginning of this book in discussing John's clothing I pointed out that the camel signifies the Gentiles. For this beast obeys the word, is restrained by fear, is tolerant of fasting and kneels to take on its burden with a kind of ordered discipline. In this comparison the wildness of the Gentiles has been tamed by obedience to God's commandments. These then enter the very narrow path of the heavenly kingdom, that is, the needle, which is the preaching of the gospel word. By it the wounds of the body are stitched together, the torn clothing is rewoven, and death itself is pricked. Therefore this is the route of this new preaching. Into it the weakness of the Gentiles will enter with less difficulty than the opulence of the rich man, that is, of the one taking pride in the law.

To have riches is no sin; but moderation is to be observed in our havings. For how shall we communicate to the necessities of the saints, if we have not out of what we may communicate?

It is a dangerous toil to become rich; and guiltlessness occupied in increasing its wealth has taken upon itself a sore burden; the servant of God gains not the things of the world, clear of the sins of the world. Hence is the difficulty of entering the kingdom of heaven.

(Verse 23) But Jesus said to his disciples: Amen I say to you, that it is difficult for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. And how did Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, being rich, enter into the kingdom of heaven (Genesis 13 and 36), and in the Gospel Matthew and Zacchaeus, leaving their riches behind, are proclaimed by the testimony of the Lord? But it must be considered that at the time they entered, they ceased to be rich. Therefore, they will not enter as long as they are rich. And yet, because riches are difficult to despise, he did not say, 'It is impossible for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven,' but rather 'It is difficult.' Where difficulty is presented, not impossibility is claimed; but rarity is demonstrated.

Because riches once gained are hard to be despised, He saith not it is impossible, but it is hard. Difficulty does not imply the impossibility, but points out the infrequency of the occurrence.

What then saith Christ? "How hardly shall the rich enter into the kingdom of Heaven!" blaming not riches but them that are held in subjection by them. But if the rich man "hardly," much more the covetous man. For if not to give one's own be an hindrance to entering the kingdom, even to take of other men's goods, think how much fire it heapeth up.

Why can it have been, however, that He said to His disciples, that "hardly shall a rich man enter in," they being poor men, and having no possessions? Instructing them not to be ashamed of their poverty, and, as it were, excusing Himself to them for suffering them to have nothing.

But though there be a difference between having and loving riches, yet it is safer neither to have nor to love them.

Whence in Mark the Lord expounding the meaning of this saying, speaks thus, It is hard for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of heaven (Mark 10:24.) They trust in riches, who build all their hopes on them.

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.

Then said Jesus unto His disciples, Verily I say unto you, That it is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. As long as a man is rich and he has in excess while others do not have even the necessities, he can in no way enter the kingdom of heaven. But when all riches have been shed, then he is not rich and so he can enter. For it is just as impossible for a man with wealth to enter the kingdom of heaven as it is for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. See how Christ first said it was difficult to enter, but here that it is completely impossible. Some say that "camel" is not the animal, but the thick cable used by sailors to cast their anchors.

And Jesus said to his disciples. Here the reason for the aforementioned doctrine is presented. And first the reason is assigned; secondly he responds to the astonishment of the disciples, at and when they had heard these things, the disciples wondered very much. He says therefore and Jesus said to his disciples etc. The occasion for saying this word was that the man went away sad, because he had said, go, sell what you have etc. A rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven: he does not say impossible. And he says rich man, not one who has riches: because some have them and do not love them, but others have them, and love them, and trust in them. Those who have and do not love can enter into the kingdom of heaven. For if this were not so, Paul would not say: charge the rich of this world not to be high-minded, nor to trust in the uncertainty of riches. But one who has and loves, it is difficult, etc. Above at 13:22: the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches choke up the word. Proverbs 28:20: he that makes haste to be rich shall not be innocent. Sirach 31:8: blessed is the rich man who is found without blemish, and who has not gone after gold etc. But this is difficult; therefore it follows: who is he, and we will praise him? For he has done wonderful things in his life.

"Gifts blind the eyes of the wise and alter the words of the just." They blind the eyes, not bodily, but spiritual; therefore they take away the light of wisdom. "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," because he has an earthly and heavy heart.

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.

(ap. Anselm.) It is explained otherwise; That at Jerusalem there was a certain gate, called, The needle's eye, through which a camel could not pass, but on its bended knees, and after its burden had been taken off; and so the rich should not be able to pass along the narrow way that leads to life, till he had put off the burden of sin, and of riches, that is, by ceasing to love them.

(Mor. xxxv. 16.) Or, by the rich man He intends any one who is proud, by the camel he denotes the right humility. The camel passed through the needle's eye, when our Redeemer through the narrow way of suffering entered in to the taking upon Him death; for that passion was as a needle which pricked the body with pain. But the camel enters the needle's eye easier than the rich man enters the kingdom of heaven; because if He had not first shown us by His passion the form of His humility, our proud stiffness would never have bent itself to His lowliness.

(Verse 24 and following) And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, 'Who then can be saved?' But Jesus looked at them and said, 'With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.' This statement shows that it is not difficult, but impossible. For if a camel cannot enter through the eye of a needle, so a rich person cannot enter the kingdom of heaven, no rich person will be saved. But if we read Isaiah, how the camels of Midian and Ephah come to Jerusalem with gifts and offerings (Isa. 60): and how those who were previously bent and distorted by the corruption of vices enter the gates of Jerusalem, we will see how even these camels, to whom the rich are compared, when they have unloaded the heavy burden of sins and the corruption of the whole body, are able to enter through the narrow gate and the narrow way that leads to life (Above 7). But when the disciples asked and were amazed at the severity of his words, he tempered the severity of his statement with his mercy, saying: What is impossible for men is possible for God.

According to this, no rich man can be saved. But if we read Isaiah, how the camels of Midian and Ephah came to Jerusalem with gifts and presents, and they who once were crooked and bowed down by the weight of their sins, enter the gates of Jerusalem, we shall see how these camels, to which the rich are likened when they have laid aside the heavy load of sins, and the distortion of their whole bodies, may then enter by that narrow and strait way that leads to life.

But having said it was hard; as He proceeds, He shows that it is even impossible, and not merely impossible, but even in the highest degree impossible; and this He showed by the comparison concerning the camel and the needle.

"It is easier" saith He, "for a camel to enter in by the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of Heaven." Whence it is shown, that there is no ordinary reward for them that are rich, and are able to practise self command. Wherefore also He affirmed it to be a work of God, that He might show that great grace is needed for him who is to achieve this.

The Gentile souls are likened to the deformed body of the camel, in which is seen the humpback of idolatry; for the knowledge of God is the exaltation of the soul. The needle is the Son of God, the fine point of which is His divinity, and the thicker part what He is according to His incarnation. But it is altogether straight and without turning; and through the womb of His passion, the Gentiles have entered into life eternal. By this needle is sewn the robe of immortality; it is this needle that has sewn the flesh to the spirit, that has joined together the Jews and the Gentiles, and coupled man in friendship with angels. It is easier therefore for the Gentiles to pass through the needle's eye, than for the rich Jews to enter into the kingdom of heaven. For if the Gentiles are with such difficulty withdrawn from the irrational worship of idols, how much more hardly shall the Jews be withdrawn from the reasonable service of God?

He adds something which seems to pertain to impossibility; hence he says and again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. Above the Lord had said that it was difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven; here that it is impossible, just as it is impossible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. Hence take it that for a rich man who has riches and does not love them, it is difficult; but for one who loves them and trusts in them, it is impossible to enter the kingdom of heaven. For that a camel cannot enter through the eye of a needle is from nature; but that a rich man who loves riches cannot enter the kingdom of heaven is from divine justice; and sooner could all things be overturned than divine justice be changed. Others, like Jerome, say: impossibility is not indicated, but difficulty. In a certain Gloss whose author is unknown, it is found that in Jerusalem there was a gate called the eye of the needle, through which laden camels could not pass: so a rich man cannot enter the kingdom of heaven unless he unburdens himself from the attachment to riches. But it is easier for a camel to be unburdened than for a rich man to put aside this attachment. Chrysostom explains mystically: by the camel are signified the gentiles, who were burdened with the sin of idolatry; by the rich, the Jews; the needle is Christ, the eye of the needle is the passion. Hence it was easier for the gentile people to pass through the passion of Christ than for the Jews, because they could not come except by leaving behind the ceremonies of the law, and this they would not do. Hence a demon was asked what is the graver sin, and he said to have what belongs to another; to whom it was answered: you lie. On the contrary, he says, because other sinners I often lose, but these I do not lose. Or thus, it is easier etc., so that by the rich man we understand the proud; by the camel, Christ; by the eye of the needle, the passion of Christ: therefore it was easier for the camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for the proud man to be humbled.

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.

Many people are deterred from seriously attempting Christian chastity because they think (before trying) that it is impossible. But when a thing has to be attempted, one must never think about possibility or impossibility. Faced with an optional question in an examination paper, one considers whether one can do it or not: faced with a compulsory question, one must do the best one can. You may get some marks for a very imperfect answer: you will certainly get none for leaving the question alone. Not only in examinations but in war, in mountain climbing, in learning to skate, or swim, or ride a bicycle, even in fastening a stiff collar with cold fingers, people quite often do what seemed impossible before they did it. It is wonderful what you can do when you have to.

We may, indeed, be sure that perfect chastity—like perfect charity—will not be attained by any merely human efforts. You must ask for God's help.

At least, when the disciples were troubled, He said, "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."

Therefore, having first "beheld them, He said unto them, The things which are impossible with men, are possible with God." For with a mild and meek look, having soothed their shuddering mind, and having put an end to their distress (for this the evangelist signified by saying, "He beheld them"), then by His words also He relieves them, bringing before them God's power, and so making them feel confidence.

But if thou wilt learn the manner of it likewise, and how what is impossible may become possible, hear. For neither for this end did He say, "The things which are impossible with men, are possible with God," that thou shouldest give it up, and abstain, as from things impossible; but that having considered the greatness of the good work, thou shouldest hasten to it readily, and having besought God to assist thee in these noble contests, shouldest attain unto life.

This must not be so understood as though it were possible for God to cause that the rich, the covetous, the avaricious, and the proud should enter into the kingdom of heaven; but to cause him to be converted, and so enter.

It has learnt not to respect life; how much more food? [You ask] "How many have fulfilled these conditions? "But what with men is difficult, with God is easy. Let us, however, comfort ourselves about the gentleness and clemency of God in such wise, as not to indulge our "necessities" up to the point of affinities with idolatry, but to avoid even from afar every breath of it, as of a pestilence.

How is it, then, that we read, "With men these things are impossible, but with God all things are possible; " and again, "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise? " Let me ask you, if you were to manumit your slave (seeing that the same flesh and soul will remain to him, which once were exposed to the whip, and the fetter, and the stripes), will it therefore be fit for him to undergo the same old sufferings? I trow not.

In this way they hold the Monarchy, but they hold neither the Father nor the Son. Well, but "with God nothing is impossible." True enough; who can be ignorant of it? Who also can be unaware that "the things which are impossible with men are possible with God? " The foolish things also of the world hath God chosen to confound the things which are wise.

And Jesus beholding, said to them: with men this is impossible etc. Here he responds to their astonishment, saying: with men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. But what is it that he says? For it seems that free will perishes if it is impossible with men. It is true that man has it of himself that he can sin; but to rise again and to do works of salvation, this he does not have of himself without the help of God's grace: for it is God himself who can do these things. Romans 9:16: it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy. Hence Job 42:1: I know that you can do all things, and with you nothing is impossible. Hence according to human power it is impossible for man to be saved, because human power does not change the will; but it belongs to God alone to change it, as is found in Philippians 2:13: who works in us both to will and to accomplish.

Caesarea Philippi is outside Judea in the region of the Gentiles. Why therefore did our Lord not examine his own disciples within the borders of Judea? Why did he go far north into the territory of the Gentiles? But as our insignificance [as Gentiles] works against us, he questioned the disciples in Gentile territory. The result was that by the true and everlasting conviction of the blessed apostle Peter—what flesh and blood had not unveiled, the Father revealed from the heavens. Through faith the Gentiles rather than the Jews would come to acknowledge the Son of God. This indeed occurred in the city of Caesarea—Cornelius who was first among the Gentiles to believe with all his own household, through the holy apostle Peter. The Lord was not inclined to question his own disciples in Judea, when the Jews did not believe that he was the Son of God but regarded him merely as the son of Joseph.

(non occ.) As soon as the Lord had taken His disciples out of the teaching of the Pharisees, He then suitably proceeds to lay deep the foundations of the Gospel doctrine; and to give this the greater solemnity, it is introduced by the name of the place, When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi.

(ap. Anselm.) When about to confirm the disciples in the faith, He would first take away from their minds the errors and opinions of others, whence it follows, And he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?

By asking, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? He implied that something ought to be thought respecting Him beyond what appeared, for He was the Son of Man. And in thus enquiring after men's opinion respecting Himself, we are not to think that He made confession of Himself; for that which He asked for was something concealed, to which the faith of believers ought to extend itself. We must hold that form of confession, that we so mention the Son of God as not to forget the Son of Man, for the one without the other offers us no hope of salvation; and therefore He said emphatically, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?

(Verse 13) And Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi. This Philip is the brother of Herod, about whom we spoke before, the tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis regions, who built Caesarea, which is now called Paneas, in honor of Tiberius Caesar, and in honor of Caesar, and also named it after himself, Caesarea Philippi, and it is in the province of Phoenicia. He imitated his father Herod, who named Caesarea in honor of August Caesar, which was formerly called the Tower of Straton. And he built, in the name of his daughter Julia, across the Jordan. This place (which is also called Ille) is Caesarea Philippi, where the Jordan River originates at the foot of Mount Lebanon, and it has two springs, one called Jor and the other Dan, which, when mixed together, become the Jordan River.

And he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? He did not say, whom do men say that I am, but the Son of man: lest he should seem to seek glory from men. And note that wherever it is written in the Old Testament, son of man, in Hebrew it is written as son of Adam. Just as it is in that (also), which we read in the psalm: Sons of men, how long will you be heavy of heart? (Psal. IV, 3), which in Hebrew is said as sons of Adam. But beautifully he asks: Whom do people say the Son of Man is? For those who speak of the Son of Man are humans; but those who understand his divinity are not humans, but gods are called.

This Philip was the brother of Herod, the tetrarch of Ituræa, and the region of Trachonitis, who gave to the city, which is now called Panæas, the name of Cæsarea in honour of Tiberius Cæsar.

Beautifully is the question put, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? For they who speak of the Son of Man, are men: but they who understood His divine nature are called not men but Gods.

He says not, Whom, do men say that I am? but, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? that He should not seem to ask ostentatiously concerning Himself. Observe, that wherever the Old Testament has 'Son of Man,' the phrase in the Hebrew is 'Son of Adam,'

Wherefore hath he mentioned the founder of the city? Because there was another besides, Caesarea Stratonis. But not in that, but in this doth He ask them, leading them far away from the Jews, so that being freed from all alarm, they might speak with boldness all that was in their mind.

And wherefore did He not ask them at once their own opinion, but that of the people? In order that when they had told the people's opinion, and then were asked, "But whom say ye that I am?" by the manner of His inquiry they might be led up to a sublimer notion, and not fall into the same low view as the multitude. Accordingly He asks them not at all in the beginning of His preaching, but when He had done many miracles, and had discoursed with them of many and high doctrines, and had afforded so many clear proofs of His Godhead, and of His unanimity with the Father, then He puts this question to them.

And He said not, "Whom say the Scribes and Pharisees that I am?" often as these had come unto Him, and discoursed with Him; but, "Whom do men say that I am?" inquiring after the judgment of the people, as unbiassed. For though it was far meaner than it should be, yet was it free from malice, but the other was teeming with much wickedness.

And signifying how earnestly He desires His Economy to be confessed, He saith, "The Son of Man;" thereby denoting His Godhead, which He doth also in many other places. For He saith, "No man hath ascended up to Heaven, but the Son of Man, which is in Heaven." And again, "But when ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up, where He was before."

Christ puts this question to His disciples, that from their answer we may learn that there were at that time among the Jews various opinions concerning Christ; and to the end that we should always investigate what opinion men may form of us; that if any ill be said of us, we may cut off the occasions of it; or if any good, we may multiply the occasions of it.

He enquires the opinions of His disciples and of those without, not because He was ignorant of them; His disciples He asks, that He may reward with due reward their confession of a right faith, and the opinions of those without He enquires, that having the wrong opinions first set forth, it might be proved that the disciples had received the truth of their confession not from common opinion, but out of the hidden treasure of the Lord's revelation.

Rather is the nature preserved, though the life blushes; nor does Christ know other men than those with reference to whom He says, "Whom do men say that I am? " And, "As ye would that men should do to you, do ye likewise so to, them.

Peter alone do I find-through (the mention of) his "mother-in-law" ,-to have been married. Monogamist I am led to presume him by consideration of the Church, which, built upon him, was destined to appoint every grade of her Order from monogamists.

Jesus asks this in order that we might know what opinions about him were current among the Jews. [He also asks] so that we might learn to inquire intently into what people are saying about him, and if it is bad, to remove the causes, or if complimentary, to increase them. But he said "Son of man" in order to show that he himself not only appears to be but in fact unchangeably is man, and again, is true God. [It is] not as if he were divided into different species, one part God and one part man; rather one may address him as Son of man with no doubt that this very same one is also the Son of God.

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am? The evangelist mentions the founder of the city, Philip, because there is another Caesarea, of Strato, and it was not in the latter, but in the former, that Christ asked them the question. He leads the disciples far away from the Jews so that they could speak boldly without fear of anyone. First He asks for the opinion of the multitude so that the disciples would be directed upwards to a greater understanding and not fall into the same lowliness of understanding as that of the people. He does not ask them, "Who do the Pharisees say that I am?" but "Who do men say?" referring to the guileless multitude.

Above, the Lord taught that the evangelical doctrine must be kept pure from the leaven of the Jews; here he teaches its eminence. And first, with regard to faith in the two natures, namely of the divinity and the humanity; second, with regard to faith in the passion, at from that time Jesus began to show to his disciples etc.; third, with regard to faith in the judicial power, at for the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father. Concerning the first: first, the opinion of the crowds about Christ is sought out; second, the faith of the disciples, at but whom do you say that I am? Concerning the first: first, the place is set forth; second, Christ's question, at whom do men say that the Son of man is? Third, Peter's response, at but they said etc. He says therefore Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea; and not only this, but he added Philippi, because there were two Caesareas, namely Caesarea of Traco, where Peter was sent to Cornelius; and this other one, which is otherwise called Paneas. The first was established by Herod in honor of Caesar Augustus; Philip built this one in honor of Tiberius. But why did the Lord raise this question here? It must be said that this city was situated at the borders of the Jews; therefore, before he wished to inquire about the faith, he drew them away from the Jews. Similarly it is found that the Lord, leading the Jews out of Egypt, did not lead them out through the lands of the Philistines, as is found in Exod. 13:17. Consequently the question is set forth: and he asked his disciples etc. A wise man, when he asks, teaches, as Jerome says. Hence in many things we are instructed, that we should be solicitous about what is said of us: so that if it is evil, we may correct it; if good, that we may preserve and multiply it. Hence take care of a good name; for this shall continue with thee, more than a thousand treasures precious and great, Ecclus. 41:15. Hence Christ asked what was said about him. Likewise, those who know the divinity are called gods, Ps. 81:6: I have said: you are gods; but those who know the humanity are called men; hence it is said whom do men say that the Son of man is? But, as Hilary says, Christ appeared to be only a man: therefore he wished them to know that he was something other than a mere man. Hence by this he gives to understand that there was something else in him. Likewise the humility of Christ is shown, because he confesses himself Son of man, according to that saying above 11:29: learn of me, because I am meek and humble of heart.

When they had presented diverse human origins concerning him, he asked what they themselves thought about him. Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." But Peter had pondered the nature of the question. For the Lord had said, "Whom do men say that the Son of man is?" Certainly his human body indicated he was a Son of man. But by adding "Who do you say that I am?" Jesus indicated that they should consider something besides what he seemed in himself, for he was a Son of man. Therefore what judgment concerning himself did he desire? It was a secret he was asking about, into which the faith of those who believe ought to extend itself.

(Verse 15, 16.) But who do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Wise reader, take note that from the following text and the discourse, the apostles are not called men, but gods. For when he had said: Who do men say that the Son of man is, he added: But who do you say that I am? To them, who are men, forming their opinions based on human things; but to you, who are gods, what do you think of me being? Peter, speaking on behalf of all the apostles, declares: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. He calls Him the living God, in distinction from those gods who are thought to be gods but are dead: Saturn, Jupiter, Venus, Minerva (or Ceres), Bacchus, Hercules, and other monstrous idols.

Observe how by this connection of the discourse the Apostles are not styled men but Gods. For when He had said, Whom say ye that the Son of Man is? Ho adds, Whom say ye that I am? as much as to say, They being men think of Me as man, ye who are Gods, whom do you think Me?

He calls Him the living God, in comparison of those gods who are esteemed gods, but are dead; such, I mean, as Saturn, Jupiter, Venus, Hercules, and the other monsters of idols.

Then, since they said, "Some John the Baptist, some Elias, some Jeremias, or one of the prophets," and set forth their mistaken opinion, He next added, "But whom say ye that I am?" calling them on by His second inquiry to entertain some higher imagination concerning Him, and indicating that their former judgment falls exceedingly short of His dignity. Wherefore He seeks for another judgment from themselves, and puts a second question, that they might not fall in with the multitude, who, because they saw His miracles greater than human, accounted Him a man indeed, but one that had appeared after a resurrection, as Herod also said. But He, to lead them away from this notion, saith, "But whom say ye that I am?" that is, "ye that are with me always, and see me working miracles, and have yourselves done many mighty works by me."

He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Once again Peter leaps forward with fervor and confesses that He is truly the Son of God. He did not say, "Thou art the anointed one, a son of God," without the article "the," but with the article, "the Son," that is, He Who is the One and the Only, not a son by grace, but He Who is begotten of the same essence as the Father. For there were also many other christs, anointed ones, such as all the priests and kings; but the Christ, with the article, there is but One.

Jesus saith to them: but whom do you say that I am? Here the faith of the disciples is sought out. And first, the question is set forth; second, the response; third, the approval. The second is at Peter answering; the third is at and Jesus answering etc. Jesus saith to them: but whom do you say that I am? As if to say: so say the crowds; but because more has been entrusted to you, therefore more is required of you. You have seen the miracles, therefore you ought to have a higher opinion. But why did he ask? Did he not know? Indeed he knew, but he wished them to merit by their confession; Rom. 10:10: with the heart we believe unto justice, but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Hence they are more meritorious, the more they are set apart, and just as to crowds knowing lower things, they should not answer with greater things, and therefore etc.

This definition is not something we have made up; Theology is, in a sense, an experimental science. It is simple religions that are the made-up ones. When I say it is an experimental science 'in a sense', I mean that it is like the other experimental sciences in some ways, but not in all. If you are a geologist studying rocks, you have to go and find the rocks. They will not come to you, and if you go to them they cannot run away. The initiative lies all on your side. They cannot either help or hinder. But suppose you are a zoologist and want to take photos of wild animals in their native haunts. That is a bit different from studying rocks. The wild animals will not come to you: but they can run away from you. Unless you keep very quiet, they will. There is beginning to be a tiny little trace of initiative on their side.

Now a stage higher; suppose you want to get to know a human person. If he is determined not to let you, you will not get to know him. You have to win his confidence. In this case the initiative is equally divided—it takes two to make a friendship.

When you come to knowing God, the initiative lies on His side. If He does not show Himself, nothing you can do will enable you to find Him.

This confession of Peter met a worthy reward, for that he had seen the Son of God in the man. Whence it follows, Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas, for flesh and blood has not revealed this unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven.

Otherwise; He is blessed, because to have looked and to have seen beyond human sight is matter of praise, not beholding that which is of flesh and blood, but seeing the Son of God by the revelation of the heavenly Father; and he was held worthy to be the first to acknowledge the divinity which was in Christ.

(Verse 17.) But Jesus answered and said to him: Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. The Apostles answer on behalf of Jesus. Peter had said: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God; a true confession has received a reward: Blessed are you, Simon Barjona. Why? because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but the Father revealed it. What flesh and blood could not reveal, has been revealed by the grace of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, from confession, it obtains the name which has revelation from the Holy Spirit, whose son is also to be called. For indeed, Barjona in our language means son of a dove. Others simply understand that Simon, that is, Peter, is the son of John, according to the question in another place: Simon, son of John, do you love me? (John 21:15) He answered: Lord, you know. And by the fault of the writers, it is corrupted so that instead of Bar Joanna, that is, son of John, it is written Barjona, with one syllable removed. Joanna, however, means 'by the grace of the Lord.' Both names can be understood mystically, as both the dove represents the Holy Spirit and grace represents the spiritual gift of God. Also, what is said, 'For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you,' is compared to the apostolic narrative where it says, 'I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood' (Galatians 1:16), signifying the Jews as flesh and blood, so that here also it may be demonstrated in a different sense that Christ, the Son of God, was revealed to him not through the teaching of the Pharisees, but through the grace of God.

This return Christ makes to the Apostle for the testimony which Peter had spoken concerning Him, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. The Lord said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonas? Why? Because flesh and blood has not revealed this unto thee, but My Father. That which flesh and blood could not reveal, was revealed by the grace of the Holy Spirit. By his confession then he obtains a title, which should signify that he had received a revelation from the Holy Spirit, whose son he shall also be called; for Barjonas in our tongue signifies The son of a dove. Others take it in the simple sense, that Peter is the son of Johnq, according to that question in another place, Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? (John 21:15.) affirming that it is an error of the copyists in writing here Barjonas for Barjoannas, dropping one syllable. Now Joanna is interpreted 'The grace of God.' But either name has its mystical interpretation; the dove signifies the Holy Spirit; and the grace of God signifies the spiritual gift.

Compare what is here said, flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, with the Apostolic declaration, Immediately I was not content with flesh and blood, (Gal. 1:16.) meaning there by this expression the Jews; so that here also the same thing is shown in different words, that not by the teaching of the Pharisees, but by the grace of God, Christ was revealed to him the Son of God.

What then saith Christ? "Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee."

Yet surely unless he had rightly confessed Him, as begotten of the very Father Himself, this were no work of revelation; had he accounted our Lord to be one of the many, his saying was not worthy of a blessing. Since before this also they said, "Truly He is Son of God," those, I mean, who were in the vessel after the tempest, which they saw, and were not blessed, although of course they spake truly. For they confessed not such a Sonship as Peter, but accounted Him to be truly Son as one of the many, and though peculiarly so beyond the many, yet not of the same substance.

And Nathanael too said, "Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel;" and so far from being blessed, he is even reproved by Him, as having said what was far short of the truth. He replied at least, "Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig-tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these."

Why then is this man blessed? Because he acknowledged Him very Son. Wherefore you see, that while in those former instances He had said no such thing, in this case He also signifies who had revealed it. That is, lest his words might seem to the many (because he was an earnest lover of Christ) to be words of friendship and flattery, and of a disposition to show favor to Him, he brings forward the person who had made them ring in his soul; to inform thee that Peter indeed spake, but the Father suggested, and that thou mightest believe the saying to be no longer a human opinion, but a divine doctrine.

And wherefore doth He not Himself declare it, nor say, "I am the Christ," but by His question establish this, bringing them in to confess it? Because so to do was both more suitable to Him, yea necessary at that time, and it drew them on the more to the belief of the things that were said.

Seest thou how the Father reveals the Son, how the Son the Father? For "neither knoweth any man the Father," saith He, "save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him." It cannot therefore be that one should learn the Son of any other than of the Father; neither that one should learn the Father of any other than of the Son. So that even hereby, their sameness of honor and of substance is manifest.

But in heavenly things every spiritual sin is a gate of hell, to which are opposed the gates of righteousness.

He does not express what it is which they shall not prevail against, whether the rock on which He builds the Church, or the Church which He builds on the rock; but it is clear that neither against the rock nor against the Church will the gates of hell prevail.

Wherefore if we, by the revelation of our Father who is in heaven, shall confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, having also our conversation in heaven, to us also shall be said, Thou art Peter; for every one is a Rock who is an imitator of Christ. But against whomsoever the gates of hell prevail, he is neither to be called a rock upon which Christ builds His Church; neither a Church, or part of the Church, which Christ builds upon a rock.

The case of Peter escaped his memory, who, although he was a man of the law, was not only chosen by the Lord, but also obtained the testimony of possessing knowledge which was given to him by the Father. He had nowhere read of Christ's being foretold as the light, and hope, and expectation of the Gentiles! He, however, rather spoke of the Jews in a favourable light, when he said, "The whole needed not a physician, but they that are sick.

And He affirmed Himself that they were quite right in their convictions; for He answered Nathanµl: "Because I said, I saw thee under the fig-tree, therefore dose thou believe?" And in the same manner He pronounced Peter to be "blessed," inasmuch as "flesh and blood had not revealed it to him"-that he had perceived the Father-"but the Father which is in heaven." By asserting all this, He determined the distinction which is between the two Persons: that is, the Son then on earth, whom Peter had confessed to be the Son of God; and the Father in heaven, who had revealed to Peter the discovery which he had made, that Christ was the Son of God.

When acknowledged by Peter as the "Christ (the Son) of God," He does not deny the relation.

This is not the property of Peter alone, but it came about on behalf of every human being. Having said that his confession is a rock, he stated that upon this rock I will build my church. This means he will build his church upon this same confession and faith. For this reason, addressing the one who first confessed him with this title, on account of his confession he applied to him this authority, too, as something that would become his, speaking of the common and special good of the church as pertaining to him alone. It was from this confession, which was going to become the common property of all believers, that he bestowed upon him this name, the rock. In the same way also Jesus attributes to him the special character of the church, as though it existed beforehand in him on account of his confession. By this he shows, in consequence, that this is the common good of the church, since also the common element of the confession was to come to be first in Peter. This then is what he says, that in the church would be the key of the kingdom of heaven. If anyone holds the key to this, to the church, in the same way he will also hold it for all heavenly things. He who is counted as belonging to the church and is recognized as its member is a partaker and an inheritor of heaven. He who is a stranger to it, whatever his status may be, will have no communion in heavenly things. To this very day the priests of the church have expelled those who are unworthy by this saying and admitted those who have become worthy by repentance.

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar Jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father Who is in heaven. He calls Peter blessed for having received knowledge by divine grace. And by commending Peter, He thereby shows the opinions of other men to be false. For He calls him "Bar Jona," that is, "son of Jona," as if saying, "Just as you are the son of Jona, so am I the Son of My Father in heaven, and of one essence with Him." He calls this knowledge "revelation," speaking of hidden and unknown things that were disclosed by the Father.

And Jesus answering etc. Here, first, he approves his confession; second, he commands it to be kept silent, at then he charged his disciples to tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ. Concerning the first: first, he approves this confession by commending the one confessing; second, by the reward, at and I say to thee that thou art Peter etc. Hence he says Jesus answered: blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona. Bar means the same as son; Jona means the same as dove: by its very name. Hence Bar-Jona, i.e., son of the dove. And the response of Christ seems to correspond to the confession of Peter. Because he had confessed him the Son of God, Jesus in turn calls him son of the dove, namely of the Holy Spirit, because this confession could not have been made except by the Holy Spirit. But it is believed that originally it was said Bar-Iona, i.e., son of John, but through a corruption of the text it was rendered thus. But what is this? Had not others also confessed him Son of God? Indeed, we read of Nathanael in John 1:49. Likewise those who were in the boat, above in chapter 9. Why then is Peter called blessed here, and not the others? Because the others had confessed him as an adopted son, but this man as the natural Son; therefore he is called blessed above the rest, because he first confessed the divinity. Origen says: it seems that before this he had not made such a confession. But how then did he send them to preach? He responds that from the beginning they did not preach that he was the Christ, but they preached penance. Likewise it may be that they preached Christ; but here for the first time that he was the Son of God. Therefore here he specially rewards. Blessed art thou, Simon etc., because blessedness is in knowledge; John 17:3: this is eternal life: that they may know thee, the only true God. But there is a twofold knowledge: one that is through natural reason, another that is above reason. The first does not bring about blessedness, because it is uncertain: hence it does not satisfy the intellect; but blessedness ought to satisfy the natural appetite, and this will be had in the fatherland; Isa. 64:4: eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, what things God hath prepared for them that love him. Therefore in this life, the more anyone can perceive of this knowledge, the more blessed he is; Prov. 3:13: blessed is the man that findeth wisdom. Hence he says blessed art thou, because you are beginning to be blessed. Because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee. This can be expounded so that flesh and blood are taken for carnal friends; Gal. 1:16: immediately I condescended not to flesh and blood. Hence flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, i.e., you did not have this from the tradition of the Jews, but from the revelation of God. Likewise, in Christ there was flesh, and blood, and divinity; therefore, because Peter did not look to the flesh and blood, it is said to him blessed art thou, because you do not judge according to what flesh and blood reveals, but according to what my Father reveals. Or you do not have this from natural industry, but from my Father. For no one knoweth the Son but the Father, Luke 10:22. For it belongs to him to manifest, whose it is to know. Hence no one knoweth, save him to whom the Father willeth to reveal; Dan. 2:28: there is a God in heaven that revealeth mysteries.

(de Cons. Ev. ii. 53.) But let none suppose that Peter received that name here; he received it at no other time than where John relates that it was said unto him, Thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted, Peter. (John 1:42.)

(Retract. i. 21.) I have said in a certain place of the Apostle Peter, that it was on him, as on a rock, that the Church was built. But I know that since that I have often explained these words of the Lord, Thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my Church, as meaning upon Him whom Peter had confessed in the words, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God; and so that Peter, taking his name from this rock, would represent the Church, which is built upon this rock. For it is not said to him, Thou art the rock, but, Thou art Peter. (1 Cor. 10:4.) But the rock was Christ, whom because Simon thus confessed, as the whole Church confesses Him, he was named Peter. Let the reader choose whether of these two opinions seems to him the more probable.

Because outside the unity of faith and charity, which makes us children and members of the Church, no one can be saved: therefore, if the Sacraments are received outside her, they are not received unto salvation, although they are true Sacraments; but they can become useful if one returns to holy mother Church, the sole bride of Christ, whose children alone Christ the bridegroom considers worthy of eternal inheritance.

Whence Augustine against the Donatists writes: "The baptism of the Church can exist outside the Church, but the gift of the blessed life is found only within the Church, which was also founded upon the rock, which received the keys of binding and loosing. This is the one Church which holds and possesses all the power of her bridegroom and Lord, through which conjugal power she can even bear children from handmaids, who, if they are not proud, will be called to the lot of inheritance; but if they are proud, they will remain outside."

Matthew sixteen: You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, etc., up to that point: it shall be loosed in heaven also; but it is established that he who can loose and bind all must be obeyed by all: therefore God so instituted the Church that one would be obeyed by all. But the Church is to be ruled and governed as it was instituted by the Lord: therefore, according to divine institution, all must obey one, namely the Supreme Pontiff.

And this is what Cyprian says: "The Lord speaks to Peter: I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock, etc. Upon one He builds the Church, and the beginning proceeds from unity, so that the Church of Christ may be shown to be one: the episcopate is one, of which a part is held by each one in its entirety: and the Church is one, which extends more broadly in multitude the increase of its fruitfulness. As there are many rays, but one light, and the branches of a tree are many, but the strength is one, founded on a tenacious root: and as from one fountain many streams flow, and although the multiplicity may seem diffused by the bounty of overflowing abundance, yet unity is preserved whole in the origin: so also the Church of God, suffused with light, extends its rays through the whole world: yet it is one that is diffused everywhere, nor is the unity of the body separated." Cyprian therefore intends that because the Church is one dove, one episcopate, one body, it ought to have been founded upon one preeminent pastor, namely Peter, as upon one bishop and head and bridegroom.

The gates of hell shall not prevail against the church; and again he declares that all the world shall be filled with his doctrine, even as the three measures of meal, in which the woman hid the leaven, were all leavened throughout and made one by that leaven. And again: The Gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world: and along with it shall the woman too be told of who did him a kindness—and we see that all these predictions have been fulfilled. For the Christians who were at one time persecuted by the Greeks and Jews have conquered, and drawn their persecutors over to their own side. In like manner we see that the Church has never been destroyed, but that its adherents have been greatly multiplied, and that similarly the whole earth has been filled with the doctrine of the Lord Christ, and is still being filled, and that the gospel is preached throughout all the world.

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA.s; According to this promise of the Lord, the Apostolic Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud, above all Heads and Bishops, and Primates of Churches and people, with its own Pontiffs, with most abundant faith, and the authority of Peter. And while other Churches have to blush for the error of some of their members, this reigns alone immoveably established, enforcing silence, and stopping the mouths of all heretics; and wet, not drunken with the wine of pride, confess together with it the type of truth, and of the holy apostolic tradition.

while we can if we choose see the Church amid a mob of Mithraic or Manichean superstitions squabbling and killing each other at the end of the Empire, while we can if we choose imagine the Church killed in the struggle and some other chance cult taking its place, we shall be the more surprised (and possibly puzzled) if we meet it two thousand years afterwards rushing through the ages as the winged thunderbolt of thought and everlasting enthusiasm; a thing without rival or resemblance; and still as new as it is old.

But this madness has remained sane. The madness has remained sane when everything else went mad. The madhouse has been a house to which, age after age, men are continually coming back as to a home. That is the riddle that remains; that anything so abrupt and abnormal should still be found a habitable and hospitable thing. I care not if the sceptic says it is a tall story; I cannot see how so toppling a tower could stand so long without foundation. Still less can I see how it could become, as it has become, the home of man. Had it merely appeared and disappeared, it might possibly have been remembered or explained as the last leap of the rage of illusion, the ultimate myth of the ultimate mood, in which the mind struck the sky and broke. But the mind did not break. It is the one mind that remains unbroken in the break-up of the world. If it were an error, it seems as if the error could hardly have lasted a day. If it were a mere ecstasy, it would seem that such an ecstasy could not endure for an hour. It has endured for nearly two thousand years; and the world within it has been more lucid, more levelheaded, more reasonable in its hopes, more healthy in its instincts, more humorous and cheerful in the face of fate and death, than all the world outside. For it was the soul of Christendom that came forth from the incredible Christ; and the soul of it was common sense.

This is the final fact, and it is the most extraordinary of all. The faith has not only often died but it has often died of old age. It has not only been often killed but it has often died a natural death; in the sense of coming to a natural and necessary end. It is obvious that it has survived the most savage and the most universal persecutions from the shock of the Diocletian fury to the shock of the French Revolution. But it has a more strange and even a more weird tenacity; it has survived not only war but peace. It has not only died often but degenerated often and decayed often; it has survived its own weakness and even its own surrender. We need not repeat what is so obvious about the beauty of the end of Christ in its wedding of youth and death. But this is almost as if Christ had lived to the last possible span, had been a white-haired sage of a hundred and died of natural decay, and then had risen again rejuvenated, with trumpets and the rending of the sky. It was said truly enough that human Christianity in its recurrent weakness was sometimes too much wedded to the powers of the world; but if it was wedded it has very often been widowed. It is a strangely immortal sort of widow. An enemy may have said at one moment that it was but an aspect of the power of the Caesars; and it sounds as strange to-day as to call it an aspect of the Pharaohs. An enemy might say that it was the official faith of feudalism; and it sounds as convincing now as to say that it was bound to perish with the ancient Roman villa. All these things did indeed run their course to its normal end; and there seemed no course for the religion but to end with them. It ended and it began again.

Christ founded the Church with two great figures of speech; in the final words to the Apostles who received authority to found it. The first was the phrase about founding it on Peter as on a rock; the second was the symbol of the keys. About the meaning of the former there is naturally no doubt in my own case; but it does not directly affect the argument here save in two more secondary aspects. It is yet another example of a thing that could only fully expand and explain itself afterwards, and even long afterwards. And it is yet another example of something the very reverse of simple and self-evident even in the language, in so far as it described a man as a rock when he had much more the appearance of a reed.

When Christ at a symbolic moment was establishing His great society, He chose for its corner-stone neither the brilliant Paul nor the mystic John, but a shuffler, a snob a coward—in a word, a man. And upon this rock He has built His Church, and the gates of Hell have not prevailed against it. All the empires and the kingdoms have failed, because of this inherent and continual weakness, that they were founded by strong men and upon strong men. But this one thing, the historic Christian Church, was founded on a weak man, and for that reason it is indestructible. For no chain is stronger than its weakest link.

(interlin.) That is, shall not separate it from the love and faith of Me.

But in this bestowing of a new name is a happy foundation of the Church, and a rock worthy of that building, which should break up the laws of hell, burst the gates of Tartarus, and all the shackles of death. And to show the firmness of this Church thus built upon a rock, He adds, And the gates of hell shall not prevail against 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?

(Verse 18.) And I also say to you. What is it that he says: And I also say to you? Because you have said to me: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God; and I say to you, not with empty words, and having no need, but I say to you: what I have said, I have done.

Because you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. Just as he gave the title of 'light' to the apostles, so too did he bestow upon Simon, who believed in Christ the rock, the name of Peter. But according to the metaphor of the rock, it is rightly said to him: I will build my church upon you.

And the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. I consider the gates of Hell to be vices and sins: or certainly the doctrines of heretics, through which deceived men are led to Tartarus. Therefore, let no one suppose that it is said concerning death, that the apostles were not subject to the condition of death, whose martyrdoms he sees flashing.

As much as to say, You have said to me, Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, therefore I say unto thee, not in a mere speech, and that goes not on into operation; but I say unto thee, and for Me to speak is to make it sor, that thou art Peter. For as from Christ proceeded that light to the Apostles, whereby they were called the light of the world, and those other names which were imposed upon them by the Lord, so upon Simon who believed in Christ the Rock, He bestowed the name of Peter (Rock.)

And pursuing the metaphor of the rock, it is rightly said to him as follows: And upon this rock I will build my Church.

I suppose the gates of hell to mean vice and sin, or at least the doctrines of heretics by which men are ensnared and drawn into hell.

Let none think that this is said of death, implying that the Apostles should not be subject to the condition of death, when we see their martyrdoms so illustrious.

What then saith Christ? "Thou art Simon, the son of Jonas; thou shalt be called Cephas." "Thus since thou hast proclaimed my Father, I too name him that begat thee;" all but saying, "As thou art son of Jonas, even so am I of my Father." Else it were superfluous to say, "Thou art Son of Jonas;" but since he had said, "Son of God," to point out that He is so Son of God, as the other son of Jonas, of the same substance with Him that begat Him, therefore He added this, "And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church;" that is, on the faith of his confession. Hereby He signifies that many were now on the point of believing, and raises his spirit, and makes him a shepherd. "And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." "And if not against it, much more not against me. So be not troubled because thou art shortly to hear that I shall be betrayed and crucified."

Therefore, O thou who wishest to become a disciple of God, do thou also get faith, the mistress of all possessions. Let this thing be to thee the beginning of thy instruction, and lay it as the foundation of the building of thy tower, in such a way that if it were to seize the height of heaven it would not fall, for the edifice of faith is its foundation, which cannot be shaken by waves and winds. And Jesus also set this faith [as] a foundation by the hand of Simon, and as our Lord made it the beginning, so also is it meet that the disciple, who would draw nigh to discipleship in systematic order, should first of all begin with it. Faith Jesus made the foundation of the whole Church, do thou also lay the foundation for thine own rule and manner of life therewith. He built thereupon excellent rules of life and conduct for the whole world, and do thou build upon it thine own triumphs and order of life. He laid it out as a foundation for all the generations of the world after His coming, and do thou make it the beginning of thy life which is in God. See then how great faith is, in that it is sufficient to bear all children of men!

And Jesus also made faith the foundation of the edifice of the Church because He saw aforetime its invincible might, its unconquerable assurance, its never-diminishing strength, its irreproachable triumph, its power which cannot be overthrown, its unenfeebled strength, its irresistible command, its decree of judgment which never turneth back, its never-failing word, and its dominion which can never fall into contempt. This faith, the mistress of triumphant deeds, did Jesus make the foundation of the Church, and the beginning of the building of His holy Body, that He might teach all men to begin therewith, and that the disciple might make it the foundation of all his rule and conduct of life. It was not set by Him to be the foundation of the Church to show its power only, but also to teach every man who might wish to begin to build the new edifice of his discipleship to make it the beginning [thereof], and in all other parts of the building it will support and raise up the mansions of the virtues.

The gates of hell are the torments and promises of the persecutors. Also, the evil works of the unbelievers, and vain conversation, are gates of hell, because they show the path of destruction.

(Concil. Con. ii. Collat. 8.) How is it that some do presume to say that these things are said only of the living? Know they not that the sentence of anathema is nothing else but separation? They are to be avoided who are held of grievous faults, whether they are among the living, or not. For it is always behoveful to fly from the wicked. Moreover there are divers letters read of Augustine of religious memory, who was of great renown among the African bishops, which affirmed that heretics ought to be anathematized even after death. (vid. Aug. Ep. 185. 4.) Such an ecclesiastical tradition other African Bishops also have preserved. And the Holy Roman Church also has anathematized some Bishops after death, although no accusation had been brought against their faith in their lifetimeu.

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.

If, because the Lord has said to Peter, "Upon this rock will I build My Church," "to thee have I given the keys of the heavenly kingdom; " or, "Whatsoever thou shale have bound or loosed in earth, shall be bound or loosed in the heavens," you therefore presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you, that is, to every Church akin to Peter, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring (as that intention did) this (gift) personally upon Peter? "On thee," He says, "will I build My Church; "and," I will give to thee the keys," not to the Church; and, "Whatsoever thou shall have loosed or bound," not what they shall have loosed or bound.

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church; and the gates of hades shall not prevail against it. The Lord gives Peter a great reward, that the Church will be built on him. Since Peter confessed Him as Son of God, the Lord says, "This confession which you have made shall be the foundation of those who believe, so that every man who intends to build the house of faith shall lay down this confession as the foundation." For even if we should construct a myriad of virtues, but we do not have as a foundation the orthodox confession, our construction is rotten. By saying "My Church" He shows that He is the Master of all, for the whole universe is the servant of God. The gates of hades are those persecutors who from time to time would send the Christians to hades. But the heretics, too, are gates leading to hades. The Church, then, has prevailed over many persecutors and many heretics. The Church is also each one of us who has become a house of God. For if we have been established on the confession of Christ, the gates of hades, which are our sins, will not prevail against us. It was from these gates that David, too, had been lifted up when he said, "O Thou that dost raise me up from the gates of death" (Ps. 9:13). From what gates, O David? From those twin gates of murder and adultery.

And I say to thee, that thou art Peter etc. Here he gives the reward for the confession. He had confessed the humanity and the divinity, and so the Lord gives the reward. First, he gives a name; second, power. Concerning the first: first, he gives the name; second, the reason for the name, at and upon this rock I will build my Church. And for this he came into this world, to found the Church. Isa. 28:16: behold, I will lay in the foundations of Sion a proved corner stone, precious, established in the foundation. This was signified by the stone which Jacob placed under his head, and anointed, as is found in Gen. 28:18. This stone is Christ, and from this anointing all are called Christians; hence we are called Christians not only from Christ, but from the rock. Therefore he specially imposes the name: thou art Peter, from the rock which is Christ. Although according to Augustine it seems that it was not imposed at this time, but from the beginning; John 1:42: thou shalt be called Cephas. Or it can be said that then it was promised, here it was given. In sign of this: upon this rock I will build my Church. The property of a rock is that it is placed in the foundation; likewise, that it gives firmness. Above 7:24: he is like a man who built his house upon a rock. Hence it can be expounded of Christ: and upon this rock, i.e., Christ, so that he may be the foundation, and so that the Church founded upon him may receive its firmness. Augustine in the book of Retractations says that he expounded it in multiple ways, and left it to the listeners to take whichever they wished. Or so that this rock points to Christ; 1 Cor. 10:4: and the rock was Christ. And elsewhere, 1 Cor. 3:11: for other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus. Another exposition: upon this rock, i.e., upon you the rock, because from me the rock you draw the fact that you are a rock. And just as I am the rock, so upon you the rock I will build, etc. But what is this? Are both Christ and Peter the foundation? It must be said that Christ is so of himself, but Peter insofar as he has the confession of Christ, insofar as he is his vicar. Eph. 2:20: built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone etc. Apoc. 21:4: the foundations of the city were twelve, and in them the twelve names of the apostles and of the Lamb. Therefore Christ is the foundation of himself, but the apostles are not so of themselves, but through the concession of Christ and the authority given by Christ; Ps. 86:1: the foundations thereof are in the holy mountains. But especially Peter's house, which is founded upon the rock, shall not be overthrown, as above 7:25. So it can be assailed, but it cannot be overcome. And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Jer. 1:19: they shall fight against thee, and shall not prevail. And what are the gates of hell? Heretics: because just as through a gate one enters a house, so through these one enters hell. Likewise tyrants, demons, sins. And although other Churches can be rebuked on account of heretics, nevertheless the Roman Church has not been corrupted by heretics, because it was founded upon the rock. Hence in Constantinople there were heretics, and the labor of the apostles was lost; but the Church of Peter alone remained inviolate. Hence Luke 22:32: I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not. And this refers not only to the Church of Peter, but to the faith of Peter, and to the whole Western Church. Hence I believe that the people of the West owe greater reverence to Peter than to the other apostles.

Peter was for twenty-four years Bishop of the Church of Rome. We cannot doubt that, amongst other things necessary for the instruction of the church, he himself delivered to them the treasury of the sacred books, which, no doubt, had even then begun to be read under his presidency and teaching.