Friday of the First Week of Lent

The beasts of the field and the birds of the air which were brought to Adam are our irrational senses, because beasts and animals represent the diverse passions of the body, whether of the more violent kind or even of the more temperate.… God granted to you the power of being able to discern by the application of sober logic the species of each and every object in order that you may be induced to form a judgment on all of them. God called them all to your attention so that you might realize that your mind is superior to all of them.

Moses said, "God brought them to Adam." This happened in order that God might make known the wisdom of Adam and the harmony that existed between the animals and Adam before he transgressed the commandment. The animals came to Adam as to a loving shepherd. Without fear they passed before him in orderly fashion, by kinds and by species. They were neither afraid of him nor were they afraid of each other. A species of predatory animals would pass by with a species of animal that is preyed upon following safely right behind.

They were not actually "fashioned," for the earth produced the animals, and the water the birds. [Gen. 1:20] By saying "fashioned" Scripture wishes to indicate that all animals, reptiles, cattle and birds came into being as a result of the combining of earth and water.

It says "He brought them to Adam" in order to indicate his wisdom, and also the peaceful state which existed between the animals and Adam prior to his transgressing the commandment. For they came to him as though to a loving shepherd, passing in front of him without any fear, flock after flock according to their species and varieties. They had no fear of him, nor were they in trepidation of one another; a herd of predators passed by, followed fearlessly by a group of the animals upon which they preyed.

So Adam took care of the earth and became master of everything on this day, in accordance with the blessing he had received--for the word of the Creator had taken effect and his blessing had been fulfilled in actual fact. That very same day did he rule over everything; and even though Adam was quick to rebel against the Lord of all things, God did not just give him the authority over all things that He had promised him, but in addition He gave him the right to allocate names, something that He had not promised him. Now if He had done more for him than what he had expected, how do you suppose He would have deprived him of what He had promised for any other reason than because he had sinned?

If it were a case of someone giving just a small number of names, the remembering of these would be nothing out of the ordinary, but to allocate thousands of names all in a single short moment, and to avoid any duplication between the first ones and the last, this is something which surpasses human ability. For someone to specify a multitude of names for a multitude of species--reptiles, wild animals, domestic cattle and birds--is quite possible, but to avoid ever calling one species by the name of another is something that belongs to God--or to a human being to whom this ability has been given by God. If God gave Adam authority, made him share in the act of creation, wrapped him in glory, and gave him the Garden, what else should He have done for him so that he might keep the commandment, but did not do?

After speaking about the fashioning of the animals and of the names they received, Scripture turns to describe Adam's sleep and the rib which was removed from him, and how woman [or a wife] was established, in the following words: "For Adam there was to be found no helper who resembled himself. " [ Genesis 2:20 ] Scripture calls Eve "helper," seeing that, even if Adam had helpers among the animals and cattle, nevertheless a helper of his own kind would be useful to him. For Eve looked after things inside, caring for the sheep, oxen, herds, and flocks in the field; she also assisted him with the buildings and the sheepfolds, and with the crafts that he invented. For even though the animals were subject to him, they were unable to assist him in these sorts of things. For that reason God made him a helper who would take care of everything along with him. And indeed she did assist him in all sorts of ways.

He who speaks contemptuously against the humble man and does not consider him an animate creature is like one who has opened his mouth against God. And though the humble man is contemptible in his eyes, his honor is esteemed by all creation. The humble man approaches ravenous beasts, and when their gaze rests upon him, their wildness is tamed. They come up to him as to their Master, wag their heads and tails and lick his hands and feet, for they smell coming from him that same scent that exhaled from Adam before the fall, when they were gathered together before him and he gave them names in paradise. This was taken away from us, but Jesus has renewed it and given it back to us through his coming. This it is that has sweetened the fragrance of the race of men.

Those names that [Adam] imposed on them remain up to the present time. In this way God determined that we might retain a constant reminder of the esteem which the human being from the outset received from the Lord of all and might attribute responsibility for its removal to a person who by sin put an abrupt end to his authority.

I AM VERY GRATIFIED by you for the fact that yesterday you received with great enthusiasm the exhortation we gave and, far from being upset at the length of the discourse, you followed it to the very end in such a way that your desire for listening reached great heights and continued at that level. Hence the sound hopes communicated to us that you would translate our advice into practice. I mean, the person who listens with such relish would clearly be prepared for practice of good works; and in a particular way your attendance today would provide a proof of your health of soul. You see, just as hunger is a sign of bodily well-being, so love for divine sayings proves to be the surest sign of the soul's health. So, when the fruit of your zeal shows the outcome of your attention, well then, let us in turn pay to you, dear people, the reward we promised yesterday, I mean the reward of this spiritual teaching, which has the capacity both to increase my own resources while I am paying it and to render you its recipients wealthy. All spiritual goods are like this, after all something that can't be said for material things. In the latter case, in other words, the one who pays reduces his own substance and makes the recipient better off, whereas in the former case, on the contrary, things are different: the one who pays increases his own wealth by so doing and the resources of the recipients become greater. So, since we are well disposed for kindness and you are ready to receive this spiritual wealth, keep the recesses of your mind in a state of readiness. Come now, let us fulfill our promise; let us take up again the thread of the reading from blessed Moses, and discharge our debt to you at this point. We need, therefore, to give an open explanation of the words read yesterday with a view to exploring precisely the richness of thought concealed in the words and proposing it to you, my dear people. In other words, listen now to the words of Sacred Scripture: "For Adam, however, there proved to be no helpmate of his kind." What is the force of this brief phrase, "For Adam, however"? Why did he add the particle? I mean, would it not have been enough to say, For Adam? Let us not be heedless in our anxiety to explore these matters, acting out of great curiosity; instead, let us act so as to interpret everything precisely and instruct you not to pass by even a brief phrase or a single syllable contained in the Holy Scriptures. After all, they are not simply words, but words of the Holy Spirit, and hence the treasure to be found in even a single syllable is great. So attend carefully, I beseech you: let everyone give an alert attention, I ask you, no one sluggish, no one drowsy; let no one be distracted in thinking of out side concerns, or bring here the worries of daily life and stay wrapt in them. Instead, consider the dignity of this spiritual gathering and the fact that we are listening to God speaking to us through the tongue of the inspired authors. Give your attention in this way and keep your mind alert lest any of the seeds sown by us will fall on rock, or by the roadside, or among thistles; instead, let the whole batch of seeds be sown on good ground, I mean the field of your mind and thus be in a position to yield you a generous crop and multiply the amount sown by us. Let us see, now at long last, what is the conjunctive force of this particle. "For Adam, however," the text says, "there proved to be no helpmate of his kind." Notice, I remind you, the precision of Sacred Scripture. After saying, "For Adam, however, there proved to be no helpmate," it did not stop there but added, "of his kind," clarifying for us by the addition the reason why it formed the conjunction with the particle. I would think the sharper ones among you would probably by now be in a position to apply yourselves to predicting what is about to be said. Since, however, we must keep our instruction addressed to you all alike and make our words clear to everybody, come now, let us teach you why he spoke in that way. But wait just a moment: you remember in what was mentioned before that after Sacred. Scripture said, "Let us make him a helpmate like himself," it immediately taught us about the creation of wild beasts, reptiles and all the irrational animals, saying as it did, "Further, God formed from the earth all the wild beasts of the field and all the birds of heaven; he led them to Adam to see what he would call them." Like their master he imposed names on them and to each species he assigned its own name, wild beasts, birds, and all irrational animals according to the intelligence granted him, so that we at this stage might be in a position to know that all those creatures, despite the ministering role they play and the assistance they give human beings in their labors, are nonetheless irrational and in great measure inferior to them just in case we might think it was about them God said, "Let us make a help mate for him." You see, although they are helpful and make a very useful contribution to the service of human beings, they are nonetheless irrational. The fact that they are helpful, after all, emerges from experience. I mean, some are suited to bearing loads for us, while others to working the soil: an ox draws the plough, cuts furrows, and provides for us much other assistance in farming; likewise an ass makes itself very useful in bearing loads; and many other of the irrational animals service our bodily needs. Sheep, after all, meet our needs from their wool for making clothes, and again in similar fashion goats provide a service for us from their coat, their milk and other things related to our living. So in case you think it was in reference to them it was said above, "Let us make him a helpmate," it now begins its statement with the words, "For Adam, however, there proved to be no helpmate of his kind," as if blessed Moses were teaching us in saying these words that, while all these animals were created and received from Adam the assignment of names, nevertheless none of them proved to be adequate for helping him. Accordingly he wants to teach us about the formation of the being about to be brought forth and the fact that this being due for creation is the one he was speaking about. "Let us make him a helpmate like himself," meaning of his kind, with the same properties as himself, of equal esteem, in no way inferior to him. Hence his words, "For Adam, however, there proved to be no helpmate of his kind," by which this blessed author shows us that what ever usefulness these irrational animals bring to our service, the help provided for Adam by woman is different and immeasurably superior.

While Adam had been given the whole earth, he had been given paradise for his home. He could leave and go out of paradise, but there was not a habitable place for humans beyond its borders—only for senseless animals, four-footed animals, wild monsters and crawling bugs. His "basilica" and "palace" was located in paradise. Because of this, God brought the living creatures to Adam; they had been separated from him. For slaves do not always stand in their master's presence; they are present only when needed. The living creatures were named and immediately sent away. Adam, however, remained in paradise.

But for Adam there was not found a helper like him. Therefore, the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam; and while he was sleeping, he took one of his ribs and filled up flesh for it. And the Lord God built the rib which he had taken from Adam into a woman. Since the woman was made from the man's side, it is to be believed that this happened to commend the power of that conjunction. But that it was done to him while he was sleeping, with the bone removed and flesh filling its place, was done for the sake of a higher mystery. For it signified that from Christ's side, asleep in death on the cross, the sacraments of salvation would issue forth, namely, blood and water, from which the Church, his bride, would be built. For if such a great sacrament were not prefigured in the creation of the woman, what need was there for Adam to sleep for God to take a rib from him to make the woman, when He could have done the same thing while he was awake and without pain? Why was it necessary that when the bone, taken from the man's side from which the woman was built, was removed, not bone but flesh was supplied in its place, unless it was to signify that Christ would be weak for the Church, but the Church would be made strong through Him? Therefore, for the sake of the same mystery, Scripture also used a typical word, not saying: made, or formed, or created, as in all the works above; but it says, the Lord God built the rib which he had taken from Adam into a woman, not as a human body, but as a house, which house we are, if we hold firm the confidence and the pride of hope till the end. For it was fitting that the origin of the human race, with God working, should proceed in such a way that it would bear witness with corresponding figures to its redemption, which was to come through the same creator at the end of the age.

What does the phrase 'deep sleep' signify? Does it not mean that when we contemplate a conjugal union we seem to be turning our eyes gradually in the direction of God's kingdom? Do we not seem, as we enter into a vision of this world, to partake a little of things divine, while we find our repose in the midst of what is secular and mundane? Hence, after the statement, 'He cast Adam into a deep sleep and he slept,' there follows: 'The rib which God took from Adam he built into a woman.' [ Gen 2:21,22 ] The word 'built' is well chosen in speaking of the creation of a woman because a household, comprising man and wife, seems to point toward a state of full perfection. One who is without a wife is regarded as being without a home. As man is considered to be more skillful in public duties, so woman is esteemed to be more adaptable to domestic ministrations. Reflect on the fact that He did not take a part from Adam's soul but a rib from his body, that is to say, not soul from a soul, but 'bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh' [ Gen 2:23 ] will this woman be called. Thus we have made clear the cause of the generation of man. But many who reflect deeply on this question are disturbed by another problem. How explain the fact that animals and beasts of the field and birds of the air were in Paradise, if at the beginning God bestowed this great gift to men, namely, the privilege of living there and of expecting afterward that, as a reward of merit, all just men should be restored to that place? Hence, many hold that by Paradise is meant the soul of man and that, while man was placed there as a worker and guardian, certain seeds of virtue sprouted forth. This may be taken to mean that the mind of man, whose virtue it is to cultivate the soul intensively, not only performs its appropriate function, but also acts as a custodian of the work accomplished. The beasts of the field and the birds of the air which were brought to Adam are our irrational senses, because beasts and animals represent the diverse emotions of the body, whether of the more violent kind or even of the more temperate. What else are we to consider the birds of the air if not as representations of our idle thoughts which, like winged creatures, flit around our souls and frequently lead us by their varied motions now in one direction, now in another? Wherefore our faculty of perception, which in Greek is represented by the word aithesis constitutes the most congenial aid to the work of our minds. Except for our intellect [ nous ] the mind has been unable to find another faculty so like itself. Perhaps you may argue that God is Himself the Author of error, because He also placed in such a Paradise entities such as these-I mean the passions of the body and the vanity of thoughts that are fleeting and empty. Take note of what He says: 'Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air and all the animals that crawl upon the earth.' [ Gen 1:25 ] You see that He granted to you the power of being able to discern by the application of sober logic the species of each and every object, in order that you may be induced to form a judgment on all of them. God called them all to your attention, so that you might realize that your mind is superior to all of them. Why have you now willed to make part of yourself and to link close to you what you have discovered to be a totally alien substance? God surely has given you a sense of perception, whereby you can know things in general and can form a judgment about them. Because you were unable to observe God's commands you were deservedly ejected from that fertile Garden. God came to the realization that you were weak and could not discriminate. Hence, He spoke to men in their weakness. 'Do not judge that you may not be judged.' [ Matt 7:1 ] He bade you, therefore, to be obedient to His imposed command, because He knew that your judgment was weak. If you had not disregarded this order, you would never ha[ve] run the risk of wavering in your judgment. And, since you wished to form a judgment, for that reason He added: 'Indeed Adam has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.' [ Gen 3:22 ] You desired to claim judgment as your right. Hence you ought not to oppose the penalty for misguided judgment. Nevertheless, He placed you in such a position outside Paradise that the recollection of it may never leave you. Hence the just are caught up into Paradise, just as Paul 'was caught up into paradise and heard secret words that man may not repeat.' [ 2 Cor 12:4,5 ] And if by the vigor of your mind you are caught up from the first heaven to the second and from the second heaven to the third, we can explain it in this way. Each and every man is first of all corporeal; secondly, he is of a sensual nature; and thirdly, he is spiritual in that he is carried to the third heaven to behold the brilliance of spiritual grace. 'The sensual man does not perceive the things that are of the Spirit.' [ 1 Cor 2:14 ] For that reason the ascent into the third heaven is necessary for him in order that he may be caught up into Paradise. At this stage, without incurring danger, you will be caught up, in order that you may be able to pass judgment on all things, because 'the spiritual man judges all things and he himself is judged by no man.' [ 1 Cor 2:15 ] Perchance, although still infirm, you will hear secret words that man may not repeat. Forbear to reveal anything and keep in your heart what you shall hear. Paul the Apostle kept these words in his heart lest he fall and for a certainty lead others into sin. Or perhaps Paul used the words 'that man may not repeat' [ 2 Cor 12:4 ] because he was still in the body, that is to say, because he saw the passions of this body of ours and because he saw the law of his flesh 'warring against the law of his mind.' [ Rom 7:23 ] I prefer to take the meaning in this sense, lest the question of future danger should seem to be disregarded. That would imply freedom during our lifetime from the anxiety and dread of snares which might lead to sin in the future. Whoever, therefore, shall reach upward into Paradise by the exercise of virtue will hear those hidden and secret words of God. He shall hear, too, the Lord speaking as to the repentant thief who abandoned his life of thievery for one of faith: 'This day thou shalt be with me in paradise.' [ Luke 23:43 ]

In Genesis: "The Lord cast a deep sleep upon Adam, and when he had fallen asleep, he took one of his ribs" and made a woman "and brought her to Adam." And why, while he slept, did He take one of his ribs? Could He not have done this while he was awake? This is mystical. Was not the Church formed from the side of Christ, when Christ fell asleep on the cross? And from His side flowed forth blood and water, that is, the Sacraments, through which the Church is reborn. From the rib of Adam, Eve was formed, who was joined to him in marriage. Just as man was formed from virgin earth, so Christ from the glorious Virgin. And just as from the side of the sleeping Adam woman was formed, so the Church from Christ hanging on the cross. And just as from Adam and Eve, Abel and his successors were formed, so from Christ and the Church the whole Christian people. And just as Eve is the mother of Abel and of all of us, so the Christian people has the Virgin as mother.

In the New Testament, after the universal scripture and the course of time, Christ was formed, as was man on the sixth day, that He may "have dominion over the fish of the sea," and "the birds of the air." As the Psalm says, "what is man that You should be mindful of him, or the son of man that You should care for him? You have made him little less than the angels, and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him rule over the works of your hands, putting all things under his feet: all sheep and oxen, yes, and the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, the fishes of the sea," etc. And in order that it be understood of Christ, the Apostle says: "You have made him little less than the angels, and crowned him with glory and honor." And there follows: "But we do see Him who was made 'a little lower than the angels,' namely, Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of His having suffered death." Man was created out of a virgin soil that had never received blood, which signifies Christ born of the Virgin; and as Eve was formed out of Adam's side, so also the Church, out of the side of Christ. But since Christ never sinned, how can Adam's transgression correspond to Him? There must be transference from the head to the body.

Of whom in the beginning was Eve begotten? What mother conceived her, the motherless? But the Scripture says that she was born out of Adam's side. Is Eve then born out of man's side without a mother, and is a child not to be born without a father, of a virgin's womb? This debt of gratitude was due to men from womankind: for Eve was begotten of Adam and not conceived of a mother, but as it were brought forth of man alone.

(Ver. 21.) And the Lord God sent a trance upon Adam. For trance, that is, the departure of the mind, is called Thardema in Hebrew, which Aquila interprets as descent, and Symmachus as heavy and deep sleep. Finally, it follows: And he slept. The same word is used in Jonah (1:5) for a deep sleep.

So, now that all the animals were created and had received their names from the first man, the loving Lord made it his concern to create a helpmate for him of his kind; having arranged everything with this creature of his in mind and for his sake brought forth all this visible creation, after all the other beings he creates also woman. Notice how he teaches us precisely the process of her creation too. I mean, after teaching us that he wanted to produce for man a helpmate like him by saying previously, "Let us make him a helpmate like him self," and then adding, "There proved to be no help mate of his own kind," accordingly he set about the formation of this creature of similar properties to him, and the text says, "God caused drowsiness to come upon Adam, and he slept. God took one of Adam's ribs and closed up the flesh in its place. The Lord God fashioned the rib he had taken from Adam into a woman and brought her to Adam." [ Gen 2:21, Gen 2:22 ] There is great force in these words, surpassing all human reasoning. I mean, it is not possible to comprehend their grandeur in any other way than by viewing everything with the eyes of faith. "God caused drowsiness to come upon Adam," the text says, "and he slept." Notice the precision of the teaching. This blessed author has stipulated both things, or rather the Holy Spirit through his tongue, teaching us the sequence of what happened. "God caused drowsiness to come upon Adam," the text says, "and he slept." It wasn't simply drowsiness that came upon him nor normal sleep; instead, the wise and skillful creator of our nature was about to remove one of Adam's ribs. Lest the experience cause him pain and afterwards he be badly disposed towards the creature formed him from His rib, and through memory of the pain bear a grudge against this being at its formation, God induced in him this kind of sleep: He caused a drowsiness to come upon him and bid him be weighed down as though by some heavy weight. His purpose was that, far from allowing man to suffer any sense of what was happening, he should, like some excellent craftsman, do away with mere appearances, supply for any deficiencies and in his own loving kindness create what had thus been taken from man. The text says, remember, "God caused drowsiness to come upon Adam, and he slept. God took one of Adam's ribs and closed up the flesh in its place" so that after the release of sleep he could not feel the loss he was suffering. You see, even if he was unaware at the time of the removal, nevertheless afterwards he would be likely to realize what had happened. So lest he cause him pain in removing it, or the loss of it cause him any distress later, he thus provided for both eventualities by making the removal painless and supplying for the loss without letting him feel anything of what had happened. So, the text says, the lord God took the rib and fashioned it into a woman. A remarkable expression, defying our reasoning with its extraordinary boldness. After all, every thing done by the lord has this character: forming the human being from dust is no less remarkable than this. Notice the considerateness of Sacred Scripture in the words employed with out limitations in mind: "God took one of his ribs," the text says. Don't take the words in human fashion; rather, interpret the concreteness of the expressions from the viewpoint of human limitations. You see, if he had not used these words, how would we have been able to gain knowledge of these mysteries which defy description? Let us therefore not remain at the level of the words alone, but let us understand everything in a manner proper to God because applied to God. That phrase, "He took," after all, and other such are spoken with our limitations in mind. Now consider how here again he follows the same practice as in the case of Adam. I mean, just as in that case he said once, a second time and in fact frequently, "The Lord God took the human being that he had formed" and again, "The Lord God instructed Adam," and further, "The Lord God said, "let us make him a helpmate like himself," so here too it says, "The Lord God fashioned the rib he had taken from Adam into a woman," and previously, "The Lord God caused drowsiness to come upon Adam." So that your might know that there is no difference between Father and Son in these expressions; instead, on account of both of them having the one essence, Sacred Scripture applies the names indiscriminately. See at any rate how, in the case of the formation of woman as well, it followed the same practice, saying, "The Lord God fashioned the rib he had taken from Adam into a woman." What would be said in this case by those heretics who are always intent on calling everything into question and who hold the opinion that the origin of the Creator of all has been comprehended? What words can express the full sense of this? What kind of mind can grasp it? He took one rib, the text says and how from this single rib did he fashion the collect being yet why do I say, how from this single thing did he fashion the being? Tell me, how did the removal happen? How was it he felt nothing of the removal? You can tell me none of these things; only the one who did the creating knows. So if we don't comprehend these things we are familiar with and what has to do with the formation of the being of the same race as ourselves, how much madness and folly does it betray to meddle in what concerns the Creator and to allege that those matters have been comprehended which not even incorporeal and divine powers have knowledge of, but rather continue without ceasing to praise in fear and trembling? "The Lord God," the text says, "fashioned the rib he had taken from Adam into a woman." See the precision of Scripture. I mean, it no longer said, He formed, but "He fashioned," since he took part of what was already formed and, so to say, made up for what was lacking. Hence it says, "He fashioned:" he didn't perform further shaping, but took some small part of the shaping already done, fashioned this part and made a complete being. How great the power of God, the master craftsman, making a likeness of those limbs from that tiny part, creating such wonderful senses, and preparing a creature complete, entire and perfect, capable both of speaking and of providing much comfort to man by a sharing of her being. For it was for the consolation of this man that this woman was created. Hence Paul also said, "Man was not created for woman, but woman for man." [ I Cor 11:9 ] Do you see how everything is made for him? I mean, after the act of creation, after the brute beasts were brought forth, some suited for eating and some capable of assisting with man's service the human being that had been formed stood in need of someone to talk to and able to offer him much comfort by a sharing of her being. So, from man's rib God creates this rational being, and in his inventive wisdom he makes it complete and perfect, like man in every detail rational, capable of rendering him what would be of assistance in times of need and the pressing necessities of life. It was God, you see, who was arranging everything in his wisdom and creative power. After all, we for our part, even though unable with the limitations of our reasoning to comprehend the way things happen, nevertheless believe that everything yields to his will and that whatever he directs is in fact brought forth. "The Lord God." The text says, "fashioned the rib he had taken from Adam into a woman, and led her to Adam," showing that it was for him that he had made her. He led her to Adam, it says. that is, since among all the other creatures there proved to be no helpmate of his kind (so the text says), lo, the promise I made (having guaranteed as I did to provide you with a helpmate of your kind) I kept by giving you one.

"God caused drowsiness to come upon Adam," the text says, "and he slept." It wasn't simply drowsiness that came upon him nor normal sleep; instead the wise and skillful creator of our nature was about to remove one of Adam's ribs. Lest the experience cause Adam afterward to be badly disposed toward the creature formed from his rib and through memory of the pain bear a grudge against this being at its formation, God induced in him this kind of sleep. God caused a drowsiness to come upon him and bid him be weighed down as though by some heavy weight.

(25) What the rib is which God took from the man whom he had formed out of the earth, and which he made into a woman? [Gen 2:21-22] The letter of this statement is plain enough; for it is expressed according to a symbol of the part, a half of the whole, each party, the man and the woman, being as sections of nature co-equal for the production of that genus which is called man. But with respect to the mind, man is understood in a symbolical manner, and his one rib is virtue, proceeding from the senses; but woman, who is the sensation of counsel, will be more variable. But some think that the rib means valour and vigour, on which account men call a boxer who as strong loins eminently strong. Therefore, the lawgiver relates that the woman was formed out of the rib of the man, indicating by that expression, that one half of the body of the man is woman. And this is testified to by the formation of the body, by the way in which it is put together, by its motions and vigour, by the force of the soul, and its strength; for all things are regarded as in a twofold light; since, as the formation of the man is more perfect, and, if one may so say, more double than the formation of the woman, so also it required half the time, that is to say forty days; when, for the imperfect, and, if I may so call it, half section of the man, that is to say the woman, there was need of a double allowance, that is to say, of eighty days, so that the doubling of the time required for the nature of the man might be changed, in order to the formation of the peculiar properties of the woman; for that body, and that soul, the nature of which is in a twofold ratio, the body and soul, that is, of the man, require but half of the delineation and formation: but that body of which the nature and construction is in the ratio of one half, namely, that of the woman, her formation and delineation is in a twofold ratio...

(27) Why, as other animals and as man also was made, the woman was not also made out of the earth, but out of the rib of the man? (#Ge 2:21). This was so ordained in the first place, in order that the woman might not be of equal dignity with the man. In the second place, that she might not be of equal age with him, but younger; since those who marry wives more advanced in years than themselves deserve blame, as having overturned the law of nature. Thirdly, the design of God was, that the husband should take care of his wife, as of a necessary part of himself; but that the woman should requite him in turn with service, as a portion of the universe. In the fourth place, he admonishes man by this enigmatical intimation, that he should take care of his wife as of his daughter; and he admonishes the woman that she should honour her husband as her father. And very rightly, since the woman changes her habitation, passing from her own offspring to her husband. On which account, it is altogether right and proper that he who has received should take upon himself the liability in respect of what has been given; and that she who has been removed should worthily give the same honour to her husband which she has previously given to her parents; for the husband receives his wife from her parents, as a deposit which is entrusted to him; and the woman receives her husband from the law.

The apostle Paul testifies that this passage has both a plain and an allegorical meaning. Discussing it in his letter to the Ephesians, he asserts, "This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church." The great mystery is that Adam hopes after receiving the promise. He sees that the spouse in whom he believed is now united to him. Therefore he symbolically announces to us that through faith the church will be the mother of humankind. It is evident that since Eve had been created from the side of the sleeping Adam, he has foreseen that from the side of Christ hanging on the cross the church, which is in truth the mother of the whole new humankind, must be created. In fact the church is "the woman who is guarded for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent."

Did Adam not suffer pain? Did he not experience agony? A single hair is plucked from the body and we feel pain. Even if one is deeply asleep, he will awake from the pain. Here, however, many hairs are plucked out, even a rib torn out, and the sleeper does not awake? God did not remove the rib violently, which would awaken Adam. He did not wrench it out. Instead Scripture, desiring to reveal the quickness of God's technique, says "he took a rib out of him and he did not awake."

It is certain that, from the very beginning of his nature, man was impressed with these instincts (of sleep). (Genesis 2:21). If you receive your instruction from God, (you will find) that the fountain of the human race, Adam, had a taste of drowsiness before having a draught of repose; slept before he laboured, or even before he ate, nay, even before he spoke; in order that men may see that sleep is a natural feature and function, and one which has actually precedence over all the natural faculties. From this primary instance also we are led to trace even then the image of death in sleep. For as Adam was a figure of Christ, Adam's sleep shadowed out the death of Christ, who was to sleep a mortal slumber, that from the wound inflicted on His side might, in like manner (as Eve was formed), be typified the church, the true mother of the living. This is why sleep is so salutary, so rational, and is actually formed into the model of that death which is general and common to the race of man. God, indeed, has willed (and it may be said in passing that He has, generally, in His dispensations brought nothing to pass without such types and shadows) to set before us, in a manner more fully and completely than Plato's example, by daily recurrence the outlines of man's state, especially concerning the beginning and the termination thereof; thus stretching out the hand to help our faith more readily by types and parables, not in words only, but also in things. [Treatise on the Soul 43]

We hold the soul to be perennially active because of its continual movement, which is a sign both of its divinity and its immortality. So, then, when rest comes—rest, that special comfort of bodies—the soul disdains an idleness that is alien to its nature and, deprived of the faculties of the body, makes use of its own. This power we call ecstasy. This occurs when we are deprived of the activity of the senses. Lacking sensory input the soul reflects conditions akin to delirium. Thus, in the beginning, sleep was preceded by ecstasy, as we read: "God sent an ecstasy upon Adam, and he slept." Sleep brought rest to the body, but ecstasy came over the soul and prevented it from resting, and from that time this combination constitutes the natural and normal form of the dream.

Not without significance, too, is the fact that woman was made out of the rib of Adam. She was not made of the same earth with which he was formed, in order that we might realize that the physical nature of both man and woman is identical and that there was one source for the propagation of the human race. For that reason, neither was man created together with a woman, nor were two men and two women created at the beginning, but first a man and after that a woman. God willed it that human nature be established as one. Thus from the very inception of the human stock he eliminated the possibility that many disparate natures should arise. He said, "Let us make him a helper like himself." We understand that to mean a helper in the generation of the human family—a really good helper. If we take the word helper in a good sense, then the woman's co-operation turns out to be something of major import in the process of generation, just as the earth by receiving, confining and fostering the seed causes it to grow and produce fruit in time. In that respect, therefore, woman is a good helper even though in a position of lesser strength. We find examples of this in our own experience. We see how people in high and important offices often enlist the help of people who are below them in rank and esteem.

Scripture says that the woman was made as man's helper so that by spiritual union she might bring forth spiritual offspring, that is, the good works of divine praise, while he rules and she obeys. He is ruled by wisdom; she, by the man. For Christ is the head of the man, and the man is the head of the woman.

Now suppose the woman was not made for the man to be his helper in begetting children, then how would she be able to help him? It would hardly be the case that she would be made to till the earth with him, for there was not yet any labor required to make her help necessary. In any case, if there were any such need, a male helper would be better, and the same could be said of the comfort of another's presence if Adam were perhaps weary of solitude. How much more agreeably could two male friends, rather than a man and a woman, enjoy companionship and conversation in a life shared together. And if they had to make an arrangement in their common life for one to command and the other to obey in order to make sure that opposing wills would not disrupt the peace of the household, there would have been proper rank to assure this, since one would be created first and the other second, and this would be further reinforced if the second were made from the first, as was the case with the woman. Surely no one will say that God was able to make from the rib of the man only a woman and not also a man if he had wished to do so. Consequently, I do not see in what sense the woman was made as a helper for the man if not for the sake of bearing children.

Even in the beginning, when woman was made from a rib in the side of the sleeping man, that had no less a purpose than to symbolize prophetically the union of Christ and his church. Adam's sleep was a mystical foreshadowing of Christ's death, and when his dead body hanging from the cross was pierced by the lance, it was from his side that there issued forth that blood and water that, as we know, signifies the sacraments by which the church is built up. "Built" is the very word the Scripture uses in connection with Eve: "He built the rib into a woman." … So too St. Paul speaks of "building up the body of Christ," which is his church. Therefore woman is as much the creation of God as man is. If she was made from the man, this was to show her oneness with him; and if she was made in the way she was, this was to prefigure the oneness of Christ and the church.

And He brought her to Adam. And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. Because when the living creatures of the earth and all the birds were brought to Adam, he found none like himself among them. Thus it was fitting that now, when he saw a helper like himself made and brought to him, he acknowledged and exclaimed, saying: This now is bone of my bones. Now indeed, because having seen other living creatures before, he did not see one like himself: Bone indeed of my bones and flesh of my flesh, because other creatures, which having bones and flesh he had seen and distinguished by name, he knew were made not from his substance, but from earth or waters. Just as he had given names to those brought to him, so it remained for him to name her whom he recognized as being like himself and created from his body.

The woman was formed from the side of the man as a companion and help for immaculate propagation. In that state the body was such that from it there would be a seminal separation for the propagation of offspring through the assistance of the female sex equally co-principiating.

"The Lord cast a deep sleep upon Adam, and when he had fallen asleep, he took one of his ribs" and made a woman "and brought her to Adam." And why, while he slept, did He take one of his ribs? Could He not have done this while he was awake? This is mystical. Was not the Church formed from the side of Christ, when Christ fell asleep on the cross? And from His side flowed forth blood and water, that is, the Sacraments, through which the Church is reborn. From the rib of Adam, Eve was formed, who was joined to him in marriage. Just as man was formed from virgin earth, so Christ from the glorious Virgin. And just as from the side of the sleeping Adam woman was formed, so the Church from Christ hanging on the cross.

"The Lord cast a stillness on Adam and he slept; He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh in its place. And the Lord made the rib that He had taken from Adam into a woman, and He brought her to Adam." [ Gen. 2:21,2:22 ] Now the man, who was wakeful, anointed with radiance, and as yet ignorant of what sleep was, fell naked on the ground and slept. It is quite likely that he saw in his dream what was being done to him in waking life.

Once the rib had been extracted in the twinkling of an eye, and God had closed up the flesh in the flicker of an eyelid, and the bare rib had been fashioned with all kinds of adornments and embellishments, God then took her and brought her to Adam who was both one and two: he was one because he was Adam, he was two because he was created male and female.

That man, awake, anointed with splendor, and who did not yet know sleep, fell on the earth naked and slept. It is likely that Adam saw in his dream what was done to him as if he were awake. After Adam's rib had been taken out in the twinkling of an eye, God closed up the flesh in its place in the blink of an eyelash. The bare bone took on the full appearance and all the beauty of a woman. God then brought her to Adam, who was both one and two. He was one in that he was Adam, and he was two because he had been created male and female.

"God took a rib from the side of Adam and made it into a woman." Here Scripture said aedificavit ("built"). The concept of building intends to denote the construction of a great house; consequently Adam's rib fashioned into a woman signifies, by apostolic authority, Christ and the church, and that is why Scripture said he formed (aedificavit) a woman from the rib. We have heard about the first Adam; let us come now to the second Adam and see how the church is made (aedificatur) from his side. The side of the Lord Savior as he hung on the cross is pierced with a lance, and from it there comes forth blood and water. Would you like to know how the church is built up from water and blood? First, through the baptism of water, sins are forgiven; then, the blood of martyrs crowns the edifice.

Hence we are justified in concluding that the ecstasy in which Adam was caught up when God cast him into a sleep was given to him so that his mind in that state might participate with the host of angels and, entering into the sanctuary of God, understand what was finally to come. When he awoke, he was like one filled with the spirit of prophecy, and seeing his wife brought before him, he immediately opened his mouth and proclaimed the great mystery that St. Paul teaches: "This now is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she has been taken out of man. And for this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall be the two in one flesh." These were the words of the first man according to the testimony of Scripture, but in the Gospel our Lord declared that God spoke them. For he says, "Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh' "? From this we should understand, therefore, that because of the ecstasy that Adam had just experienced he was able to say this as a prophet under divine guidance.

"This, he said, will be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. And as the Latin etymology agrees in these names, since Woman is named from Man, so it also agrees in Hebrew, in which language man is called 'ish', and from this name the derived term for woman is 'ishah'. Hence, that man is called 'ish' in Hebrew is also testified by the name Israel, which is interpreted as 'man seeing God'. But also in the sacraments of Christ and the Church it most fittingly agrees that Adam wanted the woman created from his flesh to share in his own name, because our Lord Jesus Christ equally gave to the Church, which He redeemed with the price of His body and blood and adopted as His bride, the participation of His name, so that from Christ she would be called Christian, and from Jesus, that is, Saviour, she would seek eternal salvation. Nor should it be overlooked that the sleep, or ecstasy, that is, the mental departure, as the ancient Translation has it, which God imposed on Adam, is rightly understood, as St. Augustine says, 'to be induced so that the mind would first participate in an ecstasy like that of the angelic court, and entering into the sanctuary of God would understand the end. Finally, waking up as if full of prophecy, when he saw the woman brought to him, he immediately uttered what the Apostle commended as a great sacrament: This now is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She will be called Woman because she was taken out of Man; and what follows.'"

Adam said that she was "woman, because she was taken from man. This," he said, "is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh." And why, while he slept, did He take one of his ribs? Could He not have done this while he was awake? This is mystical. Was not the Church formed from the side of Christ, when Christ fell asleep on the cross? And from His side flowed forth blood and water, that is, the Sacraments, through which the Church is reborn. Just as man was formed from virgin earth, so Christ from the glorious Virgin. And just as from the side of the sleeping Adam woman was formed, so the Church from Christ hanging on the cross.

Conjugal chastity accords with the law of nature by reason of the revelation shown from above. For Adam prophetically said after his deep sleep: This now is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. Wherefore a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall be in one flesh. This word is said to have been spoken by God in Matthew 19, because Adam said it while illuminated by the divine Spirit. From this the union is sacramental; and all of this belongs to it according to the state of the law of nature, from which the act and exercise of conjugal chastity itself first draws its origin.

To these men who spent their lives in the practice of holiness, there is to be added a great multitude of the elect, who, having through envy endured many indignities and tortures, furnished us with a most excellent example. Through envy, those women, the Danaids and Dircae, being persecuted, after they had suffered terrible and unspeakable torments, finished the course of their faith with stedfastness, and though weak in body, received a noble reward. Envy has alienated wives from their husbands, and changed that saying of our father Adam, "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." [Genesis 2:23] Envy and strife have overthrown great cities and rooted up mighty nations.

God moreover made the woman from the man's side, because the two sides bind the whole body close together; for he neither made her from the front of man lest the woman should exalt herself above him, nor from his back parts that he might not exalt himself above the woman; but from his side, as being in her nature his equal, although the man, as the cause, is first in point of time, but not, however, in his nature itself. And still further—since the hand always protects and guards the side to which it belongs, so when he had made the female from the male, and the male from the earth, God pronounced the two to be one flesh, both from the constitution of the two sides, and from the fruit that springs from their connection. Wherefore the fornicator sins by estranging his own flesh and sowing illegitimate progeny; nay, he that commits adultery is ranked with the homicide, since he divides what is one flesh, and thus perpetrates murder.

Having spoken of the stillness, the extracted rib and the woman fashioned out of it who had been brought to him, Scripture describes how Adam said, "This time it is bone from my bone and flesh from my flesh; let her be called woman, for she is taken from man. " [ Gen. 2:23 ] "This time" refers to the fact that she came after the animals and did not resemble them. For they came into being from the earth, whereas she "is bone from my bone and flesh from my flesh." He may have said this of her as though in prophecy, or he knew it was the case from the visionary dream he had seen, as we suggested above.

Seeing that all species of animals had received from him a name on that very day, Adam did not call the rib that had been fashioned by her personal name "Eve," but called her instead "woman," the generic name applying to her entire kind.

"This now"—that is, the one who has come to me after the animals—is not such as they; they came from the earth, but she is "bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh." Adam said this either in a prophetic way or, as noted above, according to his vision in sleep. And just as on this day all the animals received from Adam their names according to their kinds, so also the bone, made into a woman, he called not by her proper name, Eve, but by the name of woman, the name belonging to the whole kind.

(Verse 23.) Now this is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. It does not seem to sound in Greek and Latin why she is called Woman, because she was taken out of Man; but the etymology is preserved in the Hebrew language. For Man is called 'Is', and Woman is called 'Issa'. Therefore, she was rightly called Woman from Man. Hence, Symmachus also desired to preserve the etymology even in Greek, saying: She shall be called ἀνδρὶς, because she was taken from ἀνδρός, which we can say in Latin: She shall be called virago, because she was taken out of Man. Furthermore, Theodotius suspected another etymology, saying: This will be called 'assumptio' because it is taken from a man. Indeed, 'Issa' can be understood according to the variation of accent and assumption.

"He led her to Adam," the text says, remember. "Now there is someone, bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." [ Gen 2:23 ] Notice here, I ask you, dearly beloved, how along with this ineffable intelligence bestowed on him by God, which he demonstrated to us by the imposition of names he gave to all those species of brute beasts, he was endowed also with the prophetic grace. I mean, the reason why this blessed author taught us in the preceding passages that Adam was overcome by drowsiness and sleep so as to have no sense at all of what happened was that when you come to know that on seeing the woman he describes her creation precisely, you may have no doubt that he is saying this under the influence of the prophetic grace and the inspiration of instruction by the Holy Spirit. You see, when God led her to him, he said, without knowledge of anything that had happened, "Now there is someone bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." Yet some other translator renders it "This once" instead of "Now", to indicate that this happened only on this occasion, and there will be no repetition of the formation of woman. Now, it is saying, woman has been made from man whereas later it will not be like this; instead, man will come from woman or rather, not from woman but from the cooperation of the two, as Paul also says, "Man is not from woman, but woman from man; and man was not created for woman, but woman for man." [ I Cor 11:8-9 ] True, he is saying, but these words indicate that woman was made from man. Still, wait a while and you will see his precise teaching in what follows. He goes on, in fact: "Yet man is not independent of woman nor woman of man," teaching us that in the course of things the human being's composition will derive from both man and woman through their intercourse. Hence Adam, too, said, "Now there is someone, bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." Then, in order that you may come to realize the precision of his prophecy, and how what he had said has been conspicuous for its brilliance up to the present time and to its fulfillment, listen also to what follows: "She shall be called woman," it says, "because she was taken from her husband. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother, and will cling to his wife and the two will come to be one flesh." [ Gen 2:23-24 ] Do you see how he opened everything up to us, clarifying each detail precisely for us through his own prophecy: "She shall be called woman," it says, "because she was taken from her husband." Again he hints to us of the removal of his rib; then, to indicate what was about to happen, the text says, "For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother, and will cling to his wife and the two will come to be one flesh." Where, tell me, did these things come from for him to utter? From what source did he gain knowledge of future events and the fact that the race of human beings should grow into a vast number? Whence, after all, did he come to know that there would be intercourse between man and woman? I mean, the consummation of that intercourse occurred after the Fall; up till that time they were living like angels in paradise and so they were not burning with desire, not assaulted by other passions, not subject to the needs of nature, but on the contrary were created incorruptible and immortal, and on that account at any rate they had no need to wear clothes.

When this kind of second human being was made by God for man's assistance, that female was forthwith named woman; still happy, still worthy of paradise, still virgin. [On Veiling of Virgins 5]

He experienced the influence of the Spirit. For there fell upon him that ecstasy, which is the Holy Ghost's operative virtue of prophecy. But this (gift of prophecy) only came on him afterwards, when God infused into him the ecstasy, or spiritual quality, in which prophecy consists. [Treatise on the Soul 11;21]

Adam had already recognised the flesh which was in the woman as the propagation of his own substance ("This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh" Genesis 2:23 ), and the very taking of the woman out of the man was supplemented with flesh; but it ought, I should suppose, to have been made good with clay, if Adam was still clay. The clay, therefore, was obliterated and absorbed into flesh. When did this happen? At the time that man became a living soul by the inbreathing of God—by the breath indeed which was capable of hardening clay into another substance, as into some earthenware, so now into flesh. In the same way the potter, too, has it in his power, by tempering the blast of his fire, to modify his clayey material into a stiffer one, and to mould one form after another more beautiful than the original substance, and now possessing both a kind and name of its own. [On the Resurrection of the Flesh]

God gave to Eve, when she had not yet known a man, the surname "woman" and "female"—("female," whereby the sex generally; "woman," hereby a class of the sex, is marked). So, since at that time the as yet unwedded Eve was called by the word "woman," that word has been made common even to a virgin. Nor is it wonderful that the apostle—guided, of course, by the same Spirit by whom, as all the divine Scripture, so that book Genesis, was drawn up—has used the selfsame word in writing "women," which, by the example of Eve unwedded, is applicable too to a "virgin." [On Prayer 22]

Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. [Genesis 2:24] But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that commiteth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

If the union of Adam and Eve is a great mystery in Christ and in the church, it is certain that as Eve was bone of the bones of her husband and flesh of his flesh, we also are members of Christ's body, bones of his bones and flesh of his flesh.

From the law we heard: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they will become one flesh." This is a great and sublime prophecy. Who actually leaves his father and mother when he takes a wife? This is the meaning of the words: man in his original condition loved and worshiped God, his father, and the Holy Spirit, his mother. He did not have any other love. In order to take a wife, man leaves his mother and father, those whom I mentioned above. His mind is thereby diverted by this world. His soul and mind are driven away from God and drawn into this world that he adores and loves "as a man loves the wife of his youth." The love for this wife is different from the love for the father and the mother. Scripture adds, "They will become one flesh." It is true that as some men make one flesh and soul with their wife, and their mind and thoughts are driven away from their father and mother, so those who never take a wife and stay alone may have a single spirit and mind with their father.

Scripture said, "A man will leave father and mother, and he will cling to his wife, and they will be two in one flesh." This is what generally happens in the human race. There is no other way to view its plain, historical sense. But more so, this is all prophecy, and the apostle reminds us of this when he says, "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and he will cling to his wife, and they will be two in one flesh. This is a great mystery; I mean in Christ and in the church."

Wherefore a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh. Though the Scripture itself testifies that these words were first said by man, yet the Lord in the Gospel declared that God said them. For He said: Have you not read that He who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said: For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh (Matt. XIX, 4), that we might understand from this that, on account of the ecstasy which preceded in Adam, he could have said this divinely as a prophet. Therefore, if Christ adhered to the Church so they would be two in one flesh, how did He leave the Father, how the mother? He left the Father because, being in the form of God, He did not consider it robbery to be equal with God but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant (Phil. II, 6). This means He left the Father, not because He deserted and departed from the Father, but because He did not appear to men in that form in which He is equal to the Father; just as He left the mother by leaving the Synagogue of the Jews, from whom He was born according to the flesh, and adhering to the Church, which He gathered from all nations, so that in the peace of the New Testament they might be two in one flesh: because, being God with the Father through whom we were made, He became a partaker with us through the flesh, so that we could be the body of that head.

Since each of the spiritual unions signified in the Sacrament of matrimony is a union of one as agent and infuser, and of the other as patient and receiver; and this by the bond of love, which proceeds from pure will: hence it is that matrimony must be a joining of two persons, differing according to the relation of agent and patient, namely of the male sex and the female, and this from the pure consent of the will. And because consent before commingling does not make a full union, because they are not yet one flesh: hence it is that by words regarding the future, matrimony is said to be initiated, by words regarding the present confirmed, but in carnal union consummated, because then they are one flesh and become one body: and through this it fully signifies that union which is between us and Christ. For then the body of one is fully transferred to the body of the other according to the power of one's spouse for the procreation of offspring.

And the Lord said: "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife." And the Apostle said: "This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the Church." Was not the Church formed from the side of Christ, when Christ fell asleep on the cross? And from His side flowed forth blood and water, that is, the Sacraments, through which the Church is reborn. From the rib of Adam, Eve was formed, who was joined to him in marriage. Just as man was formed from virgin earth, so Christ from the glorious Virgin. And just as from the side of the sleeping Adam woman was formed, so the Church from Christ hanging on the cross. And just as from Adam and Eve, Abel and his successors were formed, so from Christ and the Church the whole Christian people.

Conjugal chastity accords with the law of nature by reason of the revelation shown from above. For Adam prophetically said after his deep sleep: This now is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. Wherefore a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall be in one flesh. This word is said to have been spoken by God in Matthew 19, because Adam said it while illuminated by the divine Spirit. From this the union is sacramental; and all of this belongs to it according to the state of the law of nature, from which the act and exercise of conjugal chastity itself first draws its origin.

I think there is also a confusion. We don't really want grief, in its first agonies, to be prolonged: nobody could. But we want something else of which grief is a frequent symptom, and then we confuse the symptom with the thing itself. I wrote the other night that bereavement is not the truncation of married love but one of its regular phases—like the honeymoon. What we want is to live our marriage well and faithfully through that phase too. If it hurts (and it certainly will) we accept the pains as a necessary part of this phase. We don't want to escape them at the price of desertion or divorce. Killing the dead a second time. We were one flesh. Now that it has been cut in two, we don't want to pretend that it is whole and complete. We will be still married, still in love. Therefore we shall still ache. But we are not at all—if we understand ourselves—seeking the aches for their own sake. The less of them the better, so long as the marriage is preserved. And the more joy there can be in the marriage between dead and living, the better.

But, it will be replied, the thing is serious. Yes; quadruply so. First, theologically, because this is the body's share in marriage which, by God's choice, is the mystical image of the union between God and Man.

Now comes the joke. The Enemy described a married couple as "one flesh". He did not say "a happily married couple" or "a couple who married because they were in love", but you can make the humans ignore that.

So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. [Genesis 2:24] This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

He said "a man shall leave his father and his mother and attach himself to his wife " [ Gen. 2:24 ] so that they might be united and the two of them become one, without division, as they were originally.

Then Adam said, "Let the man leave his father and his mother and cling to his wife so that they might be joined and the two might become one" without division as they were from the beginning.

We can say that the family is the unit of the state; that it is the cell that makes up the formation. Round the family do indeed gather the sanctities that separate men from ants and bees. Decency is the curtain of that tent; liberty is the wall of that city; property is but the family farm; honour is but the family flag. In the practical proportions of human history, we come back to that fundamental of the father and the mother and the child.

Thus, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, an intelligent man in other matters, says that there is only a "theological" opposition to divorce, and that it is entirely founded on "certain texts" in the Bible about marriages. This is exactly as if he said that a belief in the brotherhood of men was only founded on certain texts in the Bible, about all men being the children of Adam and Eve. Millions of peasants and plain people all over the world assume marriage to be static, without having ever clapped eyes on any text. Numbers of more modern people, especially after the recent experiments in America, think divorce is a social disease, without having ever bothered about any text. It may be maintained that even in these, or in any one, the idea of marriage is ultimately mystical; and the same may be maintained about the idea of brotherhood. It is obvious that a husband and wife are not visibly one flesh, in the sense of being one quadruped. It is equally obvious that Paderewski and Jack Johnson are not twins, and probably have not played together at their mother's knee. There is indeed a very important admission, or addition, to be realised here. What is true is this: that if the nonsense of Nietzsche or some such sophist submerged current culture, so that it was the fashion to deny the duties of fraternity; then indeed it might be found that the group which still affirmed fraternity was the original group in whose sacred books was the text about Adam and Eve. Suppose some Prussian professor has opportunely discovered that Germans and lesser men are respectively descended from two such very different monkeys that they are in no sense brothers, but barely cousins (German) any number of times removed. And suppose he proceeds to remove them even further with a hatchet; suppose he bases on this a repetition of the conduct of Cain, saying not so much "Am I my brother's keeper?" as "Is he really my brother?" And suppose this higher philosophy of the hatchet becomes prevalent in colleges and cultivated circles, as even more foolish philosophies have done. Then I agree it probably will be the Christian, the man who preserves the text about Cain, who will continue to assert that he is still the professor's brother; that he is still the professor's keeper. He may possibly add that, in his opinion, the professor seems to require a keeper.

And that is doubtless the situation in the controversies about divorce and marriage to-day. It is the Christian church which continues to hold strongly, when the world for some reason has weakened on it, what many others hold at other times. But even then it is barely picking up the shreds and scraps of the subject to talk about a reliance on texts. The vital point in the comparison is this: that human brotherhood means a whole view of life, held in the light of life, and defended, rightly or wrongly, by constant appeals to every aspect of life. The religion that holds it most strongly will hold it when nobody else holds it; that is quite true, and that some of us may be so perverse as to think a point in favour of the religion. But anybody who holds it at all will hold it as a philosophy, not hung on one text but on a hundred truths. Fraternity may be a sentimental metaphor; I may be suffering a delusion when I hail a Montenegrin peasant as my long lost brother. As a fact, I have my own suspicions about which of us it is that has got lost. But my delusion is not a deduction from one text, or from twenty; it is the expression of a relation that to me at least seems a reality. And what I should say about the idea of a brother, I should say about the idea of a wife.

They are trying to break the vow of the knight as they broke the vow of the monk. They recognise the vow as the vital antithesis to servile status; the alternative and therefore the antagonist. Marriage makes a small state within the state, which resists all such regimentation. That bond breaks all other bonds; that law is found stronger than all later and lesser laws. They desire the democracy to be sexually fluid, because the making of small nuclei is like the making of small nations. Like small nations, they are a nuisance to the mind of imperial scope. In short, what they fear, in the most literal sense, is home rule.

Now when we pass from loyalty to the nation to loyalty to the family, there can be no doubt about the first and plainest difference. The difference is that the family is a thing far more free. The vow is a voluntary loyalty; and the marriage vow is marked among ordinary oaths of allegiance by the fact that the allegiance is also a choice. The man is not only a citizen of the city, but also the founder and builder of the city. He is not only a soldier serving the colours, but he has himself artistically selected and combined the colours, like the colours of an individual dress. If it be admissible to ask him to be true to the commonwealth that has made him, it is at least not more illiberal to ask him to be true to the commonwealth he has himself made. If civic fidelity be, as it is, a necessity, it is also in a special sense a constraint. The old joke against patriotism, the Gilbertian irony, congratulated the Englishman on his fine and fastidious taste in being born in England. It made a plausible point in saying "For he might have been a Russian"; though indeed we have lived to see some persons who seemed to think they could be Russians when the fancy took them. If commonsense considers even such involuntary loyalty natural, we can hardly wonder if it thinks voluntary loyalty still more natural. And the small state founded on the sexes is at once the most voluntary and the most natural of all self-governing states. It is not true of Mr. Brown that he might have been a Russian; but it may be true of Mrs. Brown that she might have been a Robinson.

Now it is not at all hard to see why this small community, so specially free touching its cause, should yet be specially bound touching its effects. It is not hard to see why the vow made most freely is the vow kept most firmly. There are attached to it, by the nature of things, consequences so tremendous that no contract can offer any comparison. There is no contract, unless it be that said to be signed in blood, that can call spirits from the vasty deep; or bring cherubs (or goblins) to inhabit a small modern villa. There is no stroke of the pen which creates real bodies and souls, or makes the characters in a novel come to life. The institution that puzzles intellectuals so much can be explained by the mere material fact (perceptible even to intellectuals) that children are, generally speaking, younger than their parents. "Till death do us part" is not an irrational formula, for those will almost certainly die before they see more than half of the amazing (or alarming) thing they have done.

Where, tell me, did these things come from for him to utter? From what source did he gain knowledge of future events and the fact that the race of human beings should grow into a vast number? Whence, after all, did he come to know that there would be intercourse between man and woman? I mean, the consummation of that intercourse occurred after the fall; up till that time they were living like angels in paradise and so were not burning with desire, not assaulted by other passions, not subject to the needs of nature; on the contrary, they were created incorruptible and immortal, and on that account at any rate they had no need to wear clothes.… So from what source, tell me, did these things come for him to utter? Surely it's obvious that before his disobedience he had a share in prophetic grace and saw everything through the eyes of the Spirit.

And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. [Genesis 2:24] What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? [Genesis 2:24] Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

For when the soul hath intercourse with the body, this intercourse is adultery and fornication; but if the body be united unto the soul in one agreement, and be raised above from below in a right union, it is the intercourse which is according unto the law, which is implanted naturally in the person of each one of us by the Creator. For behold the connection which men have with women according to nature was ordained by the command of the Creator at the beginning, and when it taketh place according to the will of the Creator, it is called lawful connection; but if it be performed in any other way it is called adultery and fornication, and as in a mystery this parable is depicted in reference unto the soul and body. For if the soul hath intercourse with the body it is fornication, but if the body hath intercourse with the soul, it is an union according to the law, and towards this meaning also inclineth the words of the Book which saith, "A man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave unto his wife." Now it doth not say concerning the woman that she shall leave her parents, and cleave unto the man, although according to the custom of the world women do actually leave their natural parents, and cleave unto their husbands, and it appeareth that, according to custom, the opposite of the words of the Book are done in nature; so therefore that which is said of the man is a parable which is based on the body, which shall leave everything in which it hath gratification, and shall be united unto the soul. For if the Book had said, "A woman shall leave her parents, and cleave unto a man," it would have taught that the soul should have intercourse with the body, but now that it hath spoken concerning the man, "He shall leave his parents and be united unto his wife," the words indicate to us a mystery of doctrine, and exhort the body to deny itself its pleasures, and to hate its lusts, and to have connection with the soul in all good things.

There were more ribs in Adam, and hands that knew no weariness in God; but not more wives in the eye of God. And accordingly the man of God, Adam, and the woman of God, Eve, discharging mutually (the duties of) one marriage, sanctioned for mankind a type by (the considerations of) the authoritative precedent of their origin and the primal will of God. Finally, "there shall be," said He, "two in one flesh," not three nor four. On any other hypothesis, there would no longer be "one flesh," nor "two (joined) into one flesh." These will be so, if the conjunction and the growing together in unity take place once for all. If, however, (it take place) a second time, or oftener, immediately (the flesh) ceases to be "one," and there will not be "two (joined) into one flesh," but plainly one rib (divided) into more. But when the apostle interprets, "The two shall be (joined) into one flesh" of the Church and Christ, according to the spiritual nuptials of the Church and Christ (for Christ is one, and one is His Church), we are bound to recognise a duplication and additional enforcement for us of the law of unity of marriage, not only in accordance with the foundation of our race, but in accordance with the sacrament of Christ. From one marriage do we derive our origin in each case; carnally in Adam, spiritually in Christ. The two births combine in laying down one prescriptive rule of monogamy. In regard of each of the two, is he degenerate who transgresses the limit of monogamy. Plurality of marriage began with an accursed man. Lamech was the first who, by marrying himself to two women, caused three to be (joined) "into one flesh." [Exortation to Chastity 5]

[Man and woman] were aware, of course, of their nakedness, but they felt no shame, because no desire stirred their organs in defiance of their deliberate decision. The time had not yet come when the rebellion of the flesh was a witness and reproach to the rebellion of man against his Maker.

And they were both naked. Adam and his wife, and were not ashamed. "And rightly so, for why would they feel shame when they perceived no law in their members opposing the law of their mind? This consequence followed the sin after the transgression, with disobedience usurping what was forbidden and justice punishing what was committed: for before this happened, they were naked as said, and were not ashamed. There was no movement in the body to which shame was owing; they thought nothing needed covering, for they felt nothing needed restraint."

In the beginning, when God created man, he set him in paradise (as the divine holy Scripture says) adorned with every virtue and gave him a command not to eat of the tree in the middle of paradise. Adam was provided for in paradise, in prayer and contemplation in the midst of honor and glory, healthy in his emotions and sense perceptions, and perfect in his nature as he was created. For to the likeness of God did God make man, that is, immortal, having the power to act freely and adorned with all the virtues. When he disobeyed the command and ate of the tree that God commanded him not to eat of, he was thrown out of paradise and fell from a state in accord with his nature to a state contrary to nature, a prey to sin, to ambition, to a love of the pleasures of this life and to the other passions; and he was mastered by them and became a slave to them through his transgression.

Following this it says, "The two of them were naked, but they were not ashamed. " [ Gen. 2:25 ] It was not because they were ignorant of what shame was that they were not ashamed; for had they been infants, as the pagans say, Scripture would not have said that "they were naked but were not ashamed," nor would it have spoken of "Adam and his wife" had they not been adults. The names which Adam gave should convince us of his wisdom, and the fact that it says that "he was to work it and guard it" is to indicate his strength. Likewise, the law laid down for them is meant to testify to their adulthood--and the transgression of the law to testify to their arrogance.

It was because of the glory in which they were wrapped that they were not ashamed. Once this had been taken away from them, after the transgression of the commandment, they were ashamed because they had been stripped of it, and the two of them rushed to the leaves in order to cover not so much their bodies as their shameful members.

They were not ashamed because of the glory with which they were clothed. It was when this glory was stripped from them after they had transgressed the commandment that they were ashamed because they were naked.

The resurrection promises us nothing else than the restoration of the fallen to their ancient state; for the grace we look for is a certain return to the first life, bringing back again to paradise those who were cast out from it. If then the life of those restored is closely related to that of the angels, it is clear that the life before the transgression was a kind of angelic life, and hence also our return to the ancient condition of life is compared to the angels.

I WOULD LIKE TODAY, dearly Beloved, to open up for you spiritual treasure, which though distributed is never fully exhausted, which though bringing riches to everyone is in no way diminished but even increased. You see, just as in the case of material treasure people able to collect even a tiny nugget acquire for themselves great wealth, so too in the case of Sacred Scripture you can find in even a brief phrase great power of thought and wealth beyond telling. Such, after all, is the nature of this treasure: it enriches those receiving it without itself ever failing, rising as it does from the source which is the Holy Spirit. It remains for you, however, to keep careful guard on what is entrusted to you and preserve the memory of it untarnished so that you may with ease follow what is said, provided we make our contribution zealously. Grace, you see, is ready at hand and looks only for people welcoming it with generosity. Let us listen today also to what is read so that we may come to know of God's unspeakable love for humanity and the extent of the considerateness he employs with our salvation in mind. "They were both naked, Adam and his wife, without feeling shame." Consider, I ask you, the transcendence of their blessed condition, how they were superior to all bodily concerns, how they lived on earth as if they were in heaven, and though in fact possessing a body they did not feel the limitations of their bodies. After all, they had no need of shelter or habitation, clothing or anything of that kind. It was not idly or to no purpose that Sacred Scripture indicated this to us; it was that we might learn of this carefree condition of theirs their trouble free life and angelic condition, as you might say, and that we might attribute it completely to their indifference when later we see them bereft of all these advantages and, as it were, reduced to the utmost indigence after the great abundance of their wealth.

After stripping you of your robe, the priest himself leads you down into the flowing waters. But why naked? He reminds you of your former nakedness, when you were in paradise and you were not ashamed. For Holy Writ says, "Adam and Eve were naked and were not ashamed," until they took up the garment of sin, a garment heavy with abundant shame.

"They were both naked," the text says, remember, "and were not ashamed." You see, while sin and disobedience had not yet come on the scene, they were clad in that glory from above which caused them no shame. But after the breaking of the law, then entered the scene both shame and awareness of their nakedness.

In the statement 'the serpent was more cunning' you understand to whom reference is made. This is our Adversary, whose wisdom is of this world. Gratification of pleasure has been fittingly called wisdom, because it is called the wisdom of the flesh as in the statement, 'The wisdom of this flesh is hostile to God.' [ Rom 8:7 ] The seekers after pleasure are shrewd in their choice of means for its gratification. If you understand, therefore, gratification of pleasure to be, in fact, an act contrary to the divine command and hostile to our senses, this is in accord with what Paul states: 'I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind and making me prisoner in the law of sin. [ Rom 7:23 ] If you ascribe this to the Devil, what other cause of enmity is there except envy? As Solomon says: 'By the envy of the devil death came into the world.' [ Wisd. 2:24 ] The cause of envy was the happiness of man placed in Paradise, because the Devil could not brook the favors received by man. His envy was aroused because man, though formed in slime, was chosen to be an inhabitant of Paradise. The Devil began to reflect that man was an inferior creature, yet had hopes of an eternal life, whereas he, a creature of superior nature, had fallen and had become part of this mundane existence. This is the substance of his invidious reflection: 'Will this inferior acquire what I was unable to keep? Will he leave the earth and attain heaven, whereas I have fallen to earth thrust down from heaven? I have many ways and means by which to deceive man. He was made of slime, earth is his mother, and he is involved in things corruptible. Although of superior nature, his soul is nevertheless subject to temptation, since it exists in the prison house of the body-witness my own experience in being unable to avoid sin. This, therefore, is my first approach, namely, to deceive him while he is desirous of improving his condition. In this way an attempt will be made to arouse his ambition. The next approach is by way of the flesh, promising fulfillment of all his desires. Finally, how else can I appear to be wiser than all men if not by the exercise of cunning and fraud in my warfare of entrenchment against man?' Accordingly, he contrived not to attack Adam first. Rather, he aimed to circumvent Adam by means of the woman. He did not accost the man who had in his presence received the heavenly command. He accosted her who had learned of it from her husband and who had not received from God the command which was to be observed. There is no statement that God spoke to the woman. We know that he spoke to Adam. Hence we must conclude that the command was communicated through Adam to the woman. The nature of the temptation presented on this occasion is now clear. In addition to this, there are other occasions when many other kinds of temptations are in store for us. Some of these come from the Prince of this world, who has vomited into this world what might be called poisonous wisdom, so that men believe the false to be true and are emotionally carried away by mere appearance. The Enemy's attack is not always in the open. There are certain powers who put on the external form of what is desirable and gratifying so as to pour into our thoughts the poison of their iniquities. From this source come those sins which arise from indulgence in pleasures or from some infirmity of the mind. There are still other powers who may be said to wrestle with us, as the Apostle says: 'For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood but against the Principalities and Powers, against the worldrulers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high.' [ Eph 6:12 ] They wish by this belligerency of theirs to break us and, so to speak, to force out the breath of life from our bodies. Wherefore, like a good athlete, Paul knew how to parry the blows of the opposing powers and even to strike them as they advanced to the attack. Hence he says: 'I strike with my fists, not as one beating the air.' [ 1 Cor 9:26 ] And so like a good athlete he merited the crown of victory. [ 2 Tim 4:8 ] The temptations of the Devil, then, are manifold. For that reason he is believed to be a deadly, doubletongued serpent, doing the Devil's work by saying one thing with the tongue and by harboring other thoughts in his mind. There are other servants of the Devil who aim at us poisonous shafts of word and thought, such as are described by the Lord: 'You brood of vipers, how can you speak good things when you are evil?' [ Matt 12:34 ]

The cause of envy was the happiness of man placed in paradise, because the devil could not brook the favors received by man. His envy was aroused because man, though formed in slime, was chosen to be an inhabitant of paradise. The devil began to reflect that man was an inferior creature yet had hopes of an eternal life, whereas he, a creature of superior nature, had fallen and had become part of this mundane existence.

But since all creatures are subject to passions, lust, with the stealth of a serpent, has crept over man's affections: well therefore has holy Moses represented lust under the similitude of a serpent; for it creeps upon its belly like a serpent, not walking on foot, nor raised up on legs, gliding along by the sinuous contortions, as it were, of its whole body. Its food, as that of the serpent, is earthly, for it knows not heavenly food, but feeds on carnal things, and changes itself into various kinds of desire, and bends to and fro in tortuous wreaths. It has poison in its fangs, whereby the belly of every luxurious man is ripped up, the glutton is slain, the licker up of dishes perishes.

[The Devil] aimed to circumvent Adam by means of the woman. He did not accost the man who had in his presence received the heavenly command. He accosted her who had learned of it from her husband and who had not received from God the command which was to be observed. There is no statement that God spoke to the woman. We know that he spoke to Adam. Hence we must conclude that the command was communicated through Adam to the woman.

The serpent signifies the devil, who was certainly not simple. His cleverness is indicated by the fact that he is said to be wiser than all the beasts. The serpent was not said to be in paradise, though the serpent was among the beasts that God made. For paradise signifies the happy life, from which the serpent was absent, because it was already the devil. He had fallen from his beatitude because he did not stay in the truth. And we must not be confused as to how the serpent could speak to the woman, when she was in paradise and it was not. The serpent entered the paradise spiritually and not bodily, as the apostle suggests: "You were living by the principles of this world, obeying the ruler who dominates the air, the spirit who is at work in those who rebel."

But the serpent was more cunning than all the animals of the earth that the Lord God had made. This serpent can be said to be more cunning than all the animals, not by its own irrational soul, but by an external spirit, that is, a diabolic one. For although the transgressing angels were cast down from the heavenly seats due to their perversions and pride, they are still in nature superior to all the animals of the earth due to their excellence of reason. Therefore, it is not surprising that the devil, filling the serpent by his own impulse and mixing his spirit with it, as the soothsayers of demons are often filled, made it the most cunning of all the animals of the earth. Or, as another version has it, the wisest of the beasts according to the irrational living soul. "Therefore, if it is asked why God allowed man to be tempted, knowing that he would consent to the tempter; the true reason occurs, that man would not have been of great praise, if he could live well because no one would persuade him to live badly, since in nature he had the power to do, and in his power to will not to consent to the one persuading, with the help, however, of Him who resists the proud and gives grace to the humble. Nor is it to be thought that this tempter would have overthrown man unless there had been some pride in the soul of man to be suppressed, so that through the humiliation of sin, which he had falsely presumed about himself, he might learn truly: for it is said: Pride goes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall (Prov. XVI, 18). Thus, however, some are moved by the temptation of the first man, as if God allowed it to happen, now they do not see the entire human race being continually vexed by the devil's snares; why did God allow this as well? Is it because virtue is tested and proven, and it is more glorious to have been tempted and not consented than not to have been able to be tempted? If it is asked why the devil was permitted to tempt especially through the serpent, this was already done for the sake of signifying, not that the devil wished to signify anything for our instruction, but because he could not approach to tempt unless permitted, nor could he do so except through what was permitted. Therefore, whatever that serpent may have signified, it must be attributed to that providence under which even the devil has his desire to harm but his ability is only what is given, whether for subverting and destroying vessels of wrath or for humbling or testing vessels of mercy. The serpent did not understand the sounds of words which were made to the woman from him: for it is not to be believed that his soul was transformed into a rational nature, since not even the men, whose nature is rational, when a demon speaks in them with that passion which is required by the exorcist, know what they say: how much less would that serpent understand the sounds of words which the devil made through him and from him in that manner, as would not a man free from diabolic passion understand if he heard him speaking?"

He then said to the woman: "Did God really command you not to eat from any tree in the Garden?" To which the woman replied: "We may eat the fruit of the trees in the garden, but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God commanded us not to eat, nor to touch it, lest perhaps we die." "Therefore, first the serpent asked and the woman answered this so that the transgression would be inexcusable, and it could not in any way be said that the woman had forgotten what God had commanded."

When God had established man in the happiness of paradise in both sexes, namely male and female, the devil, envying man, having assumed the form of a serpent, attacked the woman—first by questioning: Why has God commanded you not to eat? Since the devil, who formerly was knowing and upright, by falling through pride became crafty and envious—and therefore through envy wished to tempt and through cunning knew how—he therefore tempted insofar as he was able, and God permitted it. That he assumed the serpentine form in tempting was of divine dispensation, so that not only could his craftiness be detected, but also from that figure the diabolical craftiness in tempting might become known to all the children of Adam. Again, that he tempted concerning the precept of discipline was likewise of divine dispensation, so that whether he conquered or was conquered, the merit of obedience or the demerit of disobedience might become known to all. But that he began with the woman was of his own craftiness, because it is easier to cast down the less strong; whence the cunning of the enemy attacks the city from its weaker side. Similarly, the manner in which he proceeded in the temptation was of great cunning, because he proceeded by testing, impelling, and enticing. For he conducted his test through questioning, he impelled through assurance, and he enticed through promise. For first he questioned about the reason for the commandment, so that he might lead reason into doubt.

On the sixth day the demon who hates good, seeing man honoured and thought worthy to have great care bestowed on him, became envious, and formed a design to drag him down to ruin with himself. But when he was at a loss how to assail him, he happened to perceive the beasts running straightway to their food, while the object of his envy, looking around him at such of the trees as were pleasant to the eye, remained quite unmoved the while by the calls of appetite; whence he concluded he had received some command from God about them. Having then approached nearer in the form of the serpent, he sought to learn the nature of the command, and craftily says: What! hath God said ye shall not eat of every tree in the Garden? Then the woman who had just been brought into the world, and was far inferior to the other in quickness of intelligence, answered his enquiry. Then, pretending he had already known the command (which he had only that moment learned), he began to accuse God of giving grudgingly, and to entice man to eat of the fruit, advising him at the same time to transfer his allegiance to himself; and thus, forsooth, become as God, infecting him in this way with his own disease. The man was, in fact, persuaded in the afternoon, and was that same day cast out of the garden, just as his tempter had himself, as soon as he sinned, been cast out of Heaven. Then the man heard the sentence of death pronounced upon him: Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return

[Hyperichius] also said, 'The serpent whispered to Eve and cast her out of paradise. The man who whispers against his neighbour is like the serpent. He condemns the soul of whoever listens to him, and he does not save his own.'

Having spoken of their naked state--which, because it was adorned with a heavenly raiment, was not shameful--Scripture turns to write about the astuteness of the serpent, as follows: "And the serpent was more astute than all the other wild animals that the Lord had made. " [ Gen. 3:1a ] Now even though it was astute, it was only more astute than the dumb animals which are under the control of mankind: it had not yet, just by reason of its having surpassed the level of animals in its astuteness, been raised to the level of mankind. That irrational creature was only more astute than the cattle; that mindless serpent was only more crafty than other animals. For it is clear that the serpent did not have a human mind, seeing that it did not possess human wisdom; whereas Adam, who surpassed the serpent in the way he was fashioned, by having a soul and an intellect, by his glory and by his location, clearly also infinitely surpassed the serpent in astuteness. For Adam, who had been set in authority and control over animals, was wiser than all the animals, and he who gave names to them all was certainly more astute than them all. For just as Israel could not look upon the face of Moses, [Exod. 34:33-35] neither were the animals able to look upon the radiance of Adam and Eve: at the time when they received names from him they passed in front of Adam with their eyes down, since their eyes were incapable of taking in his glory. So even though the serpent was more astute than the other animals, compared to Adam and Eve, who had authority over animals, it was foolish.

Having spoken of the serpent's astuteness, it turns to describe how the deceitful one came to Eve, as follows: "And the serpent said to the woman, 'Did God really tell you not to eat of any of the trees of Paradise?'" [ Gen. 3:1b ] On the matter of the serpent's words: either Adam knew the serpent's own language, or Satan spoke through it; or the serpent asked the question mentally, and speech was granted it, or Satan asked God that speech should temporarily be granted to the serpent.

Although the serpent was cunning, it was only more cunning than the dumb animals that were governed by Adam. It is not true that because the serpent surpassed the level of animals in cleverness, it was immediately raised up to the level of human rationality. It was only more clever than those animals that lack reason and was only more crafty than the animals that had no mind. For it is clear that the serpent, which did not have the mind of man, did not possess the wisdom of mankind. Adam was also greater than the serpent by the way he was formed, by his soul, by his mind, by his glory and by his place. Therefore it is evident that in cunning also Adam was infinitely greater than the serpent.

As for the serpent's speech, either Adam understood the serpent's own mode of communication, or Satan spoke through it, or the serpent posed the question in his mind and speech was given to it, or Satan sought from God that speech be given to the serpent for a short time.

The serpent could not enter paradise, for neither animal nor bird was permitted to approach the outer region of paradise, and Adam had to go out to meet them; so the serpent cunningly learned, through questioning Eve, the character of paradise, what it was and how it was ordered. When the accursed one learned how the glory of that inner tabernacle, as if in a sanctuary, was hidden from them, and that the Tree of Knowledge, clothed with an injunction, served as the veil for the sanctuary, he realized that its fruit was the key of justice that would open the eyes of the bold and cause them great remorse.

(Chapter 3, Verse 1) Now the serpent was more cunning than any other wild animal that was on the earth. In Hebrew, the word for cunning is Arom (אָרוּם), which Aquila and Theodotion translate as πανοῦργον. This means wicked and deceitful. Therefore, from this word, it is demonstrated more of a craftiness and cunningness than wisdom.

We must, however, listen to the words that have been read. Blessed Moses, remember, told us that they were naked without feeling shame (for they did not know, after all, that they were naked, clad as they were in ineffable glory, which adorned them better than any clothing), and added: "But the serpent was the wiliest of all the beasts upon the earth made by the Lord. The serpent said to the woman: 'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree of the garden?'" [ Gen 3:1 ] See the evil spirit's envy and devious scheming. I mean, he saw that the human being, creature though he was, had the good fortune to enjoy the highest esteem and was scarcely inferior in any respect to the angels, as blessed David also says, "You have placed him on a level scarcely lower than the angels," [ Ps 8:5 ] and even this "scarcely lower" was the result of disobedience, the inspired author, after all, uttering this after the disobedience. The author of evil, accordingly, seeing an angel who happened to live on earth, was consumed by envy, since he himself had once enjoyed a place among the powers above but had been cast down from that pinnacle on account of his depravity of will and excess of wickedness. So he employed considerable skill so as to pluck the human being from God's favor, render him ungrateful and divest him of all those goods provided for him through God's loving kindness. What did he do? He discovered this wild animal, namely, the serpent, over coming the other animals by his cunning, as blessed Moses also testified in the words, "The serpent was the wiliest of all the beasts on the earth made by the Lord God." He made use of this creature like some instrument and through it inveigled that naive and weaker vessel, namely, woman, into his deception by means of conversation. "The serpent spoke to the woman," the text says. Consider from this, dearly beloved, how in the beginning none of the wild beasts then existing caused fear either to the man or to the woman; on the contrary, they recognized human direction and dominion, and as with tame animals these days, so then even the wild and savage ones proved to be subdued. But perhaps in this case some may raise a difficulty and seek to find out if the wild animals also shared the power of speech. Not so perish the thought; rather, people, following Scripture, need to consider the fact that the words came from the devil, who was spurred on to this deception by his own ill will, while this wild animal he employed like some convenient instrument so as to be able to set the bait for his own deception and thus upset the woman first of all, being ever more readily susceptible of deception, l and then, through her, man the firstformed. So he employs this irrational animal for laying his plan, and by means of it he speaks to the woman in these words: "'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree of the garden?'" Notice in this case the extreme subtlety of his malice: in the unfolding of his planning and inquiry he introduces words not spoken by God and acts as though motivated by care for them. This, in fact, is what emerges from his words, "'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree in the garden?'" As if the evil demon were saying, Why did he deprive you of such enjoyment? Why does he not allow you to share in the good things in the garden instead of granting you the pleasure of looking at them while not permitting you to possess them and thus gain the greater enjoyment? "'Why is it that God said?'" What, he is saying, is the reason for this? What is the advantage of life in the garden when you aren't free to enjoy the things in it, but are even worse off in incurring the more intense pain of having sight of things but missing out on the enjoyment that comes from possessing them? Do you see how he uses the words like a bait to inject his poison? The woman should have been able from his very approach to recognize the extremity of his frenzy and the fact that he deliberately said what was not the case and made a pretense of care for them as part of his plan so as to be in a position to find out the instructions they had been given by God, and thus lead them to their downfall. So he did not want her to be able to recognize his trickery immediately and thus abandon converse with him as being idle speech and so avoid being dragged down to a low level. After all, there was no need for her to get involved in conversation with him in the first place; she should rather have conversed with the person for whose sake she came into being, with whom she shared everything on equal terms, and whose helpmate she had been made. But acting impetuously how, I know not she got involved in conversation with the serpent and through him as through an instrument she took in the devil's deadly words; so it ensued that she learnt from the devil's speech the very opposite to the words' real sense, and that whereas the Creator gave one set of directions, the devil said the opposite to the Creator about avoiding him, quitting further conversation with him and having only abhorrence for the creature presuming to sharpen his tongue against the direction given to them. In fact, through her grave negligence she not only failed to turn away but revealed the whole secret of the Lord's direction, thus casting pearls before swine and fulfilling what was said by Christ: "Don't cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under foot, turn on you and tear you to pieces," [ Matt 7:6 ] as in fact happened in this case. I mean, she exposed to swine, to that evil beast, that is, to the demon acting through it, the divine pearls; he not only trampled on them and opposed them with his words, but turned and led into the rupture of disobedience not only her but also the firstformed man with her. Such is the evil of idly and casually exposing to all and sundry the divine mysteries. Let those give heed who idly and indiscriminately open their mouths to everyone. Christ, after all, is not talking about real swine in that verse, but referring to people who behave like swine and, in the manner of animals, roll in the mire of sin; he thus teaches us to recognize differences in people and look to the propriety of their life style whenever it is necessary to keep secret any of the divine sayings, lest we bring harm on them and ourselves. Such people, after all, not only reap no benefit from what is said, but of the times even drag down into the same depths of ruin as themselves those who incautiously offer them these beautiful pearls. Hence we must guard them scrupulously lest we suffer the same fate as those who are deceived in this regard. You see, if in the present instance also the woman had decided not to offer pearls to swine, she would not have fallen into the abyss herself nor dragged her husband down with her.

Before the fall, all things were subject to the control of man, because God had made him ruler over all the things on the earth and in the water. And the serpent was on intimate terms with man, associating with him more than all the rest and conversing agreeably with him. For that reason it was through this relation that the devil, who is the source of evil, made that most evil suggestion to our first parents.

Do not think of the snake the way he currently is, since we now run from him and are disgusted by him. It was not this way in the beginning; the snake was a friend of humanity, even the closest of servants. What, then, made him our enemy? The declaration of God: "You are more cursed than all the cattle, and more than every wild animal. I will place hostility between you and the woman." This hostility destroyed the friendship. I say "friendship," but I do not mean an intellectual relationship, it was instead one which mindless creatures are capable of having. The snake used to serve humans in the same way the dog displaces friendship—not with word but by body language. Since it was a creature who held such great closeness to humanity, the snake was a convenient tool for the devil.…So the devil spoke through the snake in order to deceive Adam. Please hear me in love and do not receive my words carelessly. My question is not easy to take. Many scoff, "how did the snake speak, with a human's voice or with a snake's hiss?" or "how did Eve understand him?" Before the fall, Adam was filled with wisdom, discernment and prophecy.… When the devil noticed the snake's intelligence and Adam's high opinion of it (Adam considered the snake very wise), the devil spoke through the snake so that Adam would think that the snake, being intelligent, was able to imitate even human speech.

Although you are aware that the serpent is wiser than all creatures, his cunning is especially noticeable here. As he sets his snares, he pretends to give utterance to the words of God, for God had already said: 'From every tree of the garden you may eat, but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you must not eat, for the day you eat of it you must die. [ Gen 2:16 ] The serpent inserted a falsehood in questioning the woman thus: 'Did God say, you shall not eat of any tree?' Whereas God had actually said: 'From every tree of the garden you may eat, but from one tree you must not eat,' meaning, by that, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which was not to be tasted. We need not wonder at the manner of deception. Deceit accompanies any effort at ensnaring an individual. The serpent's question was not without its purpose. But the woman's reply will indicate that there was nothing questionable in the command of God: 'Of the fruit of all the trees in the garden we may eat, but of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God said, you shall not eat of it neither shall you touch it, lest you die.' There was nothing inexact about the command itself. The error lay in the report of the command. The Scriptural passage under discussion is self-explanatory. We realize that we ought not to make any addition to a command even by way of instruction. Any addition or qualification of a command is in the nature of a falsification. The simple, original form of a command should be preserved or the facts should be duly set before us. It frequently happens that a witness adds something of himself to a relation of facts. In this way, by the injection of an untruth, confidence in his testimony is wholly shattered. No addition therefore--not even a good one--is called for. What is, therefore, at first sight objectionable in the addition made by the woman: 'Neither shall you touch anything of it'? God did not say this, but, rather: 'you must not eat.' Still, we have here something which leads to error. There are two possibilities to the addition she made: Either it is superfluous or because of this personal contribution she has made God's command only partly intelligible. John in his writings has made this clear: 'If anyone shall add to them, God will add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if anyone shall take away from these words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his portion from the tree of life.' [ Rev 22:18,19 ] If this is true in this case, how much truer is it that nothing should be taken away from the commands laid down by God! From this springs the primary violation of the command. And many believe that this was Adam's fault-not the woman's. They reason that Adam in his desire to make her more cautious had said to the woman that God had given the additional instruction: 'Neither shall you touch it.' We know that it was not Eve, but Adam, who received the command from God, because the woman had not yet been created. Scripture does not reveal the exact words that Adam used when he disclosed to her the nature and content of the command. At all events, we understand that the substance of the command was given to the woman by the man. What opinions others have offered on this subject should be taken into consideration. It seems to me, however, that the initial violation and deceit was due to the woman. Although there may appear to be an element of uncertainty in deciding which of the two was guilty, we can discern the sex which was liable first to do wrong. Add to this the fact that she stands convicted in court whose previous error is afterward revealed. The woman is responsible for the man's error and not vice-versa. Hence Paul says: 'Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and was in sin.' [ 1 Tim 2:14 ] Now let us examine another question relative to the addition which was made to the command. Does this addition in itself seem to be objectionable? If the words, 'neither shall you touch it,' are actually advantageous and tend to put one on his guard, why did not God expressly forbid this even to the point of seemingly permitting it by not forbidding it? Wherefore, both points must be examined; namely, the reasons why He neither permitted it nor forbade it. Some raise the question: Why did He not order that the object which He had made should be seen and touched? But, when you realize that there was in that tree the knowledge of good and evil, you can understand that He did not wish you to touch what is evil. Sufficient is it for us, using the words of the Lord, 'to watch Satan fall as lightning from heaven,' [ Luke 10:18 ] and giving to his sons not the meat of life, but that of night and darkness, as it is written: 'He gave him to be meat for the people of the Ethiopians.' [ Ps 73:14 ] Thus far on the subject of the reason why He did not command the tree to be touched. Here are the reasons, as I understand them, why God did not prohibit this act. There are many things which do us harm, if we make up our minds to touch them before we know what they are. We often learn, in fact, by experience to be resigned if we know beforehand that a certain food or drink is bitter. You learn to be tolerant if you believe that what is bitter is beneficial, lest your sudden realization of its bitterness may offend you and cause you to reject what may prove to be salutary. It is advantageous, therefore, first to have knowledge of this bitter quality, so that you may not be squeamish and that you may realize what is good for you. These are examples of what may harm us just to a slight degree. From the discussion which now follows, take warning of what may cause us more serious damage unless we make provision against it. Take the case of the Gentile who is eager for the faith. He becomes a catechumen and desires a greater fullness of doctrine to strengthen his faith. See to it that in his willingness to learn he is not exposed to false doctrine. Take care that he does not learn from Photinus or from Arius or from Sabellius. See that he does not hand himself over to teachers of this sort who would attract him by their airs of authority, so that his untrained mind, impressed by the weight of such august prestige, will be unable to discriminate the right from the wrong. He should first, therefore, determine with the eyes of his mind what are the logical sequences. Let him note where life exists by touching the life-giving qualities of holy Scripture, so that no interpreter will stand in his way. Sabellius reads for him: 'I am in the Father and the Father in me,' [ John 14:10 ] and says that means one Person. Photinus reads that 'there is one Mediator between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus.' [ 1 Tim 2:5 ] And elsewhere: 'Why do you wish to kill me, a man?' [ John 8:40 ] Arius, too, read the following: 'For the Father is greater than I.' [ John 14:28 ] The reading is clear, but the catechumen first ought to reflect on the matter in his own mind, so as to discover the real meaning of these passages. He is influenced by the prestige of his teachers. It would have been more to his advantage if he had not investigated at all rather than have come upon such an instructor. But the Gentile, too, if he takes up the Scriptures, reads: 'Eye for eye, tooth for tooth.' [ Lev 24:20 ] Again: 'If thy right hand is an occasion of sin to thee, cut it off.' [ Matt 5:30 ] He does not understand the sense of this. He is not aware of the secret meaning of the divine words. He is worse off than if he had not read at all. Hence he has furnished a lesson to these men on how they should have investigated the meaning of the Word of God. A careful, not a superficial, examination of the context of the passage should be made. It is written: 'What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked upon and our hands have investigated: of the Word of Life. And we have seen and now testify and announce to you.' [ John 1:1,2 ] You see how he investigated, so to speak, with his hands the Word of God and afterward announced it. Hence, the Word would not perhaps have caused injury to Adam and Eve if they had first touched and handled it, as it were, with the hands of the mind. Those who are infirm can by careful examination and handling investigate the nature of each and every object which they do not understand. Certainly, those weak first parents of ours should have studied beforehand the problem presented to them: How were they to touch the tree in which they knew there was knowledge of evil? The knowledge of evil, in fact, can frequently be of advantage to us. Wherefore we read in the oracular words of Scripture of the wiles of the Devil, so that we learn how we can escape his arts. We should be aware of his temptations, not that we may follow his lead, but that by instruction we may avoid these pitfalls. At this point there are some who doubt whether God meant that the fruit of every tree should be eaten-this injunction to include every tree, inclusive of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil-or whether, in fact, He referred to every tree, but excluded only the tree of knowledge of good and evil? These people are of the opinion that this matter is not without significance, because, although the fruit of this tree is harmful in itself, still, if it were combined with that of the other trees, it could not be injurious. They cite as example of this fact the belief that an antidote can be obtained from the body of a serpent which, being poisonous since it is extracted from a serpent, is harmful when taken alone, but when mixed with other drugs has medicinal properties. The knowledge of good and evil, also, if one possesses wisdom that is ever an aid toward survival and if one reaches out after the other types of virtue, is considered to be of no inconsiderable value. On that account, therefore, many hold that we can even understand the reason why God made this prohibition. He did not wish that tree of the knowledge of good and evil should be eaten alone and not in combination with the fruit of the others. He did not prohibit this if the other trees are taken into consideration at the same time. Wherefore what God said to Adam is cited: 'Who told you that you were naked? You have eaten, then, of the tree which alone I commanded you not to eat.' [ Gen 3:11 ] This would seem to offer an occasion for disputation. In the preceding passage the woman might well have not made any reply to the serpent's question: 'Did God say, you shall not eat of any tree of the garden?' But she answered: 'Of the tree in the middle of the garden, God said, you shall not eat of it.' In this incident, as she was on the point of sinning, the woman's faith may appear to have been weak. Moreover, I shall not despoil Adam of all the virtues, so that he would appear to have attained no virtue in Paradise and would seem to have eaten nothing from the other trees, but had fallen into sin before he had obtained any fruit. I shall, therefore, not despoil Adam lest I may despoil the whole human race, which is innocent before it acquires the capacity to know good and evil. Not without reason was it said: 'Unless you turn and become like this child, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.' [ Matt 18:3 ] The child, when he is scolded, does not retaliate. When he is struck, he does not strike back. He is not conscious of the allurements of ambition and self-seeking. The truth seems to be, then, that He commanded the tree not to be eaten, not even along with the fruit of the other trees. Knowledge of good, in fact, although of no use to a perfect man, is, on the other hand, of no value to a man who is imperfect. Paul speaks of himself as imperfect: 'Not that I have already obtained this or already have been made perfect, but I press on hoping that I may lay hold of it already.' [ Phil 3:12 ] Hence the Lord says to the imperfect: 'Do not judge that you may not be judged.' [ Matt 7:1 ] Knowledge is, therefore, of no use to the imperfect. Hence we read: 'I did not know sin unless the Law had said, thou shalt not lust.' And further on we read: 'For without the Law sin is dead.' [ Rom 7:7,8 ] What advantage is it to me to know what I cannot avoid? What avails it for me to know that the law of my flesh assails me? Paul is assailed and sees 'the law of his flesh warring against that of his mind and making him prisoner to the law of sin.' He does not rely on himself, but by the grace of Christ is confident of his 'deliverance from the body of death.' [ Rom 7:23:24 ] Do you think that anyone with knowledge of sin can avoid it? Paul says: 'For I do not the good that I wish, but the evil that I do not wish.' [ Rom 7:19 ] Do you consider that this knowledge which adds to the reproach of sin can be of help to man? Granted, however, that the perfect man is unable to sin. God foresaw all men in the person of Adam. Hence it was not fitting that the human race in general should have a knowledge of good and evil-a knowledge which he could not utilize because of the weakness of the flesh.

Let us, however, listen to what she says to him in reply. That is, when he said, "'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree of the garden?'" the woman replied to the serpent, "'We do eat of every tree of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden God said, Do not eat or even touch it in case you die.'" [ Gen 3:2, Gen 3:3 ] Do you see his malice? He said what was not the case so as to entice her into conversation with him and thus learn what was the case. The woman, you see, is evidently encouraged as though he were kindly disposed to her, and she reveals the whole of the instruction, tells him all in detail, and by her reply deprives herself of any excuse. I mean, what could you say in your defense, woman? "God said, Do not eat of any tree in the garden." You ought to have turned away from the speaker and said to him, Be off, you are a cheat, you do not know the force of the direction given us, nor the extent of the enjoyment we have, nor the abundance of good things given us. For your part you said God has told us to taste nothing of any tree, whereas out of his great goodness the Lord and Creator has permitted us enjoyment and control of them all, bidding us keep away only from one, and this likewise out of great care for us lest we taste it and die. You should, had you been in your right mind, have ad dressed these words to him, turned away from him utterly, and have had nothing to do with him nor listened to anything said by him

(32) Did the serpent speak with a human voice? [Gen 3:2] In the first place, it may be the fact that at the beginning of the world even the other animals besides man were not entirely destitute of the power of articulate speech, but only that man excelled them in a greater fluency and perspicuity of speech and language. In the second place, when anything very marvellous requires to be done, God changes the subject natures by which he means to operate. Thirdly, because our soul is entirely filled with many errors, and rendered deaf to all words except in one or two languages to which it is accustomed; but the souls of those who were first created were rendered acute to thoroughly understand every voice of every kind, in order that they might be pure from evil and wholly unpolluted. Since we indeed are not endowed with senses in such perfection, for those which we have received are in some degree depraved, just as the construction of our bodies too is small; but the first created men, as they received bodies of vast size reaching to a gigantic height, must also of necessity have received more accurate senses, and, what is more excellent still, a power of examining into and hearing things in a philosophical manner. For some people think, and perhaps with some reason, that they were endowed with such eyes as enabled them to behold even those natures, and essences, and operations, which exist in heaven, as also ears by which they could comprehend every kind of voice and language.

(33) Why did the serpent accost the woman, and not the man? [Gen 3:2] The serpent, having formed his estimate of virtue, devised a treacherous stratagem against them, for the sake of bringing mortality on them. But the woman was more accustomed to be deceived than the man. For his counsels as well as his body are of a masculine sort, and competent to disentangle the notions of seduction; but the mind of the woman is more effeminate, so that through her softness she easily yields and is easily caught by the persuasions of falsehood, which imitate the resemblance of truth. Since therefore, in his old age, the Serpent{5}{the ancients believed that the serpent became young again by casting his skin. Ovid says--Anguibus exuitur tenui cum pelle vetustas.} strips himself of his scales from the top of his head to his tail, he, by his nakedness, reproaches man because he has exchanged death for immortality. His nature is renewed by the beast, and made to resemble every time. The woman, when she sees this, is deceived; when she ought rather to have looked upon him as an example, who, while showing his ingenuity towards her, was full of devices, but she was led to desire to acquire a life which should be free from old age, and from all decay.

The manner in which the devil proceeded in the temptation was of great cunning, because he proceeded by testing, impelling, and enticing. For he conducted his test through questioning, he impelled through assurance, and he enticed through promise. For first he questioned about the reason for the commandment, so that he might lead reason into doubt; second, doubt having been established—Lest perhaps we die—he gave assurance, so that he might lead the irascible power into contempt; third, he promised, so that he might lead the concupiscible power into desire, and thus by these three modes might draw the freedom of choice to consent, which faculty belongs to reason and will, embracing nonetheless the three aforesaid powers: the rational, the irascible, and the concupiscible.

The tempter then turned its mind to the commandment of the One who had set down the commandment. Adam and Eve were commanded not only to not eat from the tree, but they were not even to draw near to it. The serpent then realized that God had forewarned them about even looking at it lest they become entrapped by its beauty. With this in mind, the serpent enticed Eve to look upon it.

(35) Why, when it was commanded them to avoid eating of one plant alone, the woman made also a further addition to this injunction, saying, "He said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it?" (#Ge 3:3). In the first place she says this, because taste and every other sense after its kind consists in the touch appropriate to it. In the second place she says it that it may seem to condemn them themselves, who did what they had been forbidden. For if even the mere act of touching it was prohibited, how could they who, besides touching the tree, presumed to eat of the fruit, and so added a greater transgression to the lesser one, be anything but condemners and punishers of themselves?

Let us learn, therefore, that the temptations of the Devil are full of guile. Of the things that he promised, scarcely one of them seems to be true. He contrived falsehoods, as we can see if we read elsewhere: 'And the serpent said to the woman, you shall not die.' [ Gen 3:4 ] Here we have one falsehood, for man, who followed the promises of the serpent, is subject to death. Hence he added: 'For God knows that when you eat of it, your eyes will be opened.' [ Gen 3:5 ] This alone is true, because further on we read: 'They both ate and their eyes were opened.' [ Gen 3:7 ] But the truth is that as a result of this act harm followed. Hence, opening one's eyes is not to everyone's advantage, for it is written: 'They will see and will not see.' [ Isa 6:9 ] But the serpent was quick to attach a falsehood to his statement, when he said: 'And you will be like gods, knowing good and evil.' [ Gen 3:5 ] Hence you may note that the serpent is the author of idolatry, for his cunning seems to be responsible for man's error in introducing many gods. His deceit lay in stating that they will be like gods, for not only have men ceased to be like gods, but even those men who were like gods (to whom it was spoken, 'I have said you are gods') [ Ps 81:6 ] have fallen from His favor. 'And the woman saw that the tree was good for food, pleasing to the eyes and beautiful to gaze upon.' [ Gen 3:6 ] She showed her weakness in passing judgment on what she had not tasted. It is not easy under any circumstance to make such an assumption without deep reflection and a careful examination of the facts. 'She took of its fruit,' we are told, 'and ate it and also gave some to her husband and they both ate.' [ Gen 3:6 ] Omission is made, and rightly so, of the deception of Adam, since he fell by his wife's fault and not because of his own. 'And their eyes were opened,' we are told, 'and they realized that they were naked.' [ Gen 3:7 ] They were naked, it is true, before this time, but they were not devoid of the garments of virtue. They were naked because of the purity of their character and because nature knows nothing of the cincture of deceit. Now, on the other hand, the mind of man is veiled in many folds of deception. When, therefore, they saw that they had been despoiled of the purity and simplicity of their untainted nature, they began to look for objects made by the hand of man wherewith to cover the nakedness of their minds and hearts. They added gratification so as to increase the idle pleasures of this world, sewing, as it were, leaf upon leaf in order to conceal and cover the organ of generation. But how explain the fact that Adam had his bodily eyes closed, whereas he was able to see all living creatures and confer names upon them? Well, just as by way of an inner and deeper knowledge they were able to realize, not that they were without garments, but that the protective covering of virtue was no longer theirs. 'So they sewed fig-leaves together and made themselves coverings.' [ Gen 3:7 ] We are taught by the content of holy Scripture how we should interpret the meaning of the word 'fig' in this passage. Scripture relates that the saints are those who find rest beneath the vine and the fig. [ Mich 4:4 ] Solomon has said: 'Who plants the fig tree and does not eat the fruit thereof?' [ Prov 27:18 ] Yet the owner may come to the fig tree and may be offended by finding there merely leaves and no fruit. I have information from Adam himself, in fact, about the significance of the leaves. He proceeded to make a covering for himself out of the leaves of the fig tree after he had sinned, whereas he should have had its fruit instead. The just man chooses the fruit; the sinner, the leaves. What is the fruit? We read: 'The fruit of the spirit is charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, modesty, continency, love.' [ Gal 5:22 ] He who possessed no fruit possessed no joy. The person who violated the command of God did not have faith, and he who ate of the forbidden tree did not have the virtue of continency. Whoever, therefore, violates the command of God has become naked and despoiled, a reproach to himself. He wants to cover himself and hide his genitals with fig leaves, making use, as it were of empty and idle talk which the sinner interweaves word after word with fallacies for the purpose of shielding himself from his awareness of his guilty deed. Desiring to conceal his fault, he throws leaves over himself, at the same time indicating that the Devil is responsible for his crime. He offers allurements of the flesh or the recommendations of another individual as excuses for his wrongdoing. He frequently produces examples from holy Scripture, citing them as instances of how a just man may fall into sin, the sin of adultery: 'And Abraham lay with his handmaid and David loved a strange woman whom he made his wife.' [ Gen 16:13; 2 Kings 11:4 ] He patches together examples for his purposes from the list of prophetical books of Scripture. He sees the leaves and ignores the fruit. Do not the Jews seem to you to be patchers of leaves when they interpret in a material manner the words of the spiritual Law? Their interpretation, condemned to eternal aridity, loses all the characteristic greenness of the fruit. There is a correct interpretation, therefore, which points to a fruitful and spiritual fig tree beneath which just men and saints find their rest. [ Micah 4:4 ] Whoever plants this tree in the souls of every man will eat the fruit thereof, as Paul says: 'I have planted, Apollos watered.' [ 1 Cor 3:6 ] But the wrong interpretation will not confer the fruit nor conserve its viridity. It was a serious matter, therefore, when, following this interpretation, Adam girded himself in that place where it would have been better that he havhad girded himself with the fruit of chastity. Seeds of generation are said to exist in our loins around which we bind our garments. Hence, Adam did wrong on that occasion when he girded himself with leaves that have no utility, inasmuch as by this act he implied, not the fruit of a future generation, but certain sins which remained until the coming of our Lord and Saviour. But, when the master came, He found the fig tree uncultivated. Elsewhere, when requested that he should order it to be cut down, the owner of the fig tree allowed it to be cultivated. [ Matt 21:19; Luke 13:6-9 ] And so we gird ourselves, not with leaves, but with the divine Word, as the Lord Himself says: 'Let your loins be girt about and your lamps burning.' [ Luke 12:35 ] Wherefore He prohibits us to carry money even in our girdles. [ Matt 10:9 ] Our girdles ought not to store up worldly objects, but things of eternal nature.

But the serpent said to the woman: "By no means shall you die. For God knows that on whichever day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." What is understood here except that she was persuaded to not want to be under God, but rather in her own power without God, so as not to follow His law as if He envied them, so that they themselves might govern, not needing His eternal light, but relying on their own providence as if with their own eyes to discern good and evil which He had prohibited. In these words, it is notable with what great craftiness the devil's wickedness tempted man from the beginning, who not only taught him disobedience and contempt for his Creator as if envious, but also proposed a belief in the multiplicity of gods, saying: "And you will be like gods," so that if he could not perhaps drag him into disobedience, he would nonetheless corrupt the purity of the faith with which they worshipped the one God; but if he succeeded, he would be victorious in both respects. "But when would the woman believe with these words that she had been divinely forbidden from a good and useful thing, unless the love of her own power and a certain proud presumption about herself was already in her mind, which was to be convinced and humbled through that temptation? Finally, not content with the serpent's words, she considered the tree and saw, as Scripture says, that it was good to eat, and pleasing to the eyes, and delightful to look at; and not believing that she could die from it, I think she believed that God had said for some reason of significance; if you eat of it, you shall die; and therefore SHE TOOK FROM ITS FRUIT AND ATE, AND GAVE IT TO HER HUSBAND, perhaps even with persuasive words, which Scripture leaves silent but intelligible. Or perhaps there was no need to persuade the man when he saw that she had not died from that food?"

The devil attacked the woman—first by questioning: Why has God commanded you not to eat? second by asserting: You shall not die at all: third by promising: You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil: wishing by this temptation to cast down the weaker woman and through her afterwards to overthrow the male sex. For first he questioned about the reason for the commandment, so that he might lead reason into doubt; second, doubt having been established, he gave assurance: You shall not die at all, so that he might lead the irascible power into contempt; third, he promised, so that he might lead the concupiscible power into desire, and thus by these three modes might draw the freedom of choice to consent.

Instead, however, she revealed the secret of the instruction and told him what God had said to them, and thus received from him a different kind of advice, bringing ruin and death. That is to say, when the woman said, "We do eat of every tree of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden God said, Do not eat or even touch it," that evil creature, enemy of our (129a) salvation, in his turn offered advice at odds with that of the Lord. You see, whereas the loving God had forbidden their tasting that fruit on account of his great care for them lest they be subject to death for their disobedience, that evil creature said to the woman "'You will not truly die.'" [ Gen 3:4 ] What kind of excuse could anyone find appropriate to the woman for being prepared to give her complete attention to the creature that spoke with such temerity? I mean, after God said, "Do not touch it lest you die," he said, "You will not truly die." Then, not being satisfied with contradicting the words of God, he goes on to misrepresent the Creator as jealous so as to be in a position to introduce deceit by this means, get the better of the woman and carry out his own purpose. "You will not truly die," he said. "God, you see, knows that on the day that you eat of it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." [ Gen 3:5 ] (129b) See all the bait he offered: he filled the cup with a harmful drug and gave it to the woman, who did not want to recognize its deadly character. She could have known this from the outset, had she wanted; instead, she listened to his word, that God forbade their tasting the fruit for that reason "He knows that your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods, knowing good from evil" puffed up as she was with the hope of being equal to God and evidently dreaming of greatness. Such, after all, are the stratagems of the enemy: when ever he lures someone to a great height through deceit, at that very point he casts them down into a deep abyss. The woman, you see, had dreams of equality with God and hastened to taste the fruit; she had evidently set her mind and her thinking on that goal, and she thought of nothing else than how to drink the cup prepared for her by the wicked demon. That is to say, listen to the account Scripture gives so as to learn that she was bent on this course after receiving that deadly poison through the serpent's advice.

Do you see how the devil led her captive, handicapped her reasoning and caused her to set her thoughts on goals beyond her real capabilities, in order that she might be puffed up with empty hopes and lose her hold on the advantages already accorded her?

(34) Why the serpent tells the woman lies, saying, "God has said, Ye shall not eat of every tree in the Paradise," when, on the contrary, what God really had said was, "Ye shall eat of every tree in the Paradise, except one?" (#Ge 3:4). It is the custom for contending arguers to speak falsely in an artful manner, in order to produce ignorance of the real facts, as was done in this case, since the man and woman had been commanded to eat of all the trees but one. But this insidious prompter of wickedness coming in, says that the order which they had received was that they should not eat of them all. He brought forward an ambiguous statement as a slippery stumbling-block to cause the soul to trip. For this expression, "Ye shall not eat of every tree," means in the first place either, not even of one, which is false; or, secondly, not of every one, as if he intended to say, there are some of which you may not eat, which is true. Therefore he asserts such a falsehood more explicitly.

And indeed pride, although it be in itself a great sin, is of such sort in itself alone apart from others, that it for the most part follows after and steals with more rapid foot, not so much upon sins as upon things which are actually well done. However, that which he has understood in another sense, is after all most truly said: "Pride is the commencement of all sin;" because it was this which overthrew the devil, from whom arose the origin of sin; and afterwards, when his malice and envy pursued man, who was yet standing in his uprightness, it subverted him in the same way in which he himself fell. For the serpent, in fact, only sought for the door of pride whereby to enter when he said, "Ye shall be as gods." Truly then is it said, "Pride is the commencement of all sin;" and, "The beginning of pride is when a man departeth from God."

The conclusion is that the devil would not have begun by an open and obvious sin to tempt man into doing something that God had forbidden, had not man already begun to seek satisfaction in himself and consequently to take pleasure in the words "you shall be as gods." The promise of these words, however, would much more truly have to pass if, by obedience, Adam and Eve had kept close to the ultimate and true source of their being and had not, by pride, imagined that they were themselves the source of their being.… Whoever seeks to be more than he is becomes less. Whenever he aspires to be self-sufficing, he retreats from the One who is truly sufficient for him.

Both meditated iniquity, affecting height: the one, of power; the other, of knowledge. For the foolish woman believed him who promised, but who was deceiving: "You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Had he not already first deceived himself, he who had persuaded himself that he would be like the Most High? For he who thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, deceives himself.

Third, the devil promised: You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil, so that he might lead the concupiscible power into desire, and thus by these three modes might draw the freedom of choice to consent, which faculty belongs to reason and will, embracing nonetheless the three aforesaid powers: the rational, the irascible, and the concupiscible; with respect to which the devil enticed the woman through a threefold desirable object, namely through knowledge, which is desirable to the rational power; through excellence after the manner of God, which is desirable to the irascible power; through the sweetness of the tree, which is desirable to the concupiscible power. And thus he tempted everything that was temptable in the woman, through everything by which she could be led into temptation, which is the threefold desirable object of the world, namely the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life; according to which three things the origin of every temptation is discerned, whether from the world, or from the flesh, or from the devil.

Adam with his wife contracted the vice of curiosity, when the devil said to them: "You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil": he also contracted the vice of carnality, when he ate of the fruit: he also contracted the vice of vanity, when he wished to be as gods.

Hear, brothers: those who have the knowledge of the Saints, namely clerics, let them take heed for themselves, lest they have anything of vice mixed in; because if a man mixes in anything of vice, he loses the knowledge of discerning between good and evil.

The reasoning of the devil leads to hell: it is a fallacy, a sophistic and destructive reasoning. For the devil deceived the first man and assumed the existence in the heart of man of a kind of self-evident proposition such as this: the rational creature must needs desire to be the same as its Creator since He is its likeness--and, said he, "When you eat, you will be like God." Hence it is good to eat of the forbidden fruit in order to become like Him. And by this syllogism all men sin, for as Dionysius says, "No one commits evil with evil as a goal: every man intends good and desires good. But he is deceived because he takes for true what is only a likeness of good." By means of this same fallacy, the devil made man fall into the sufferings of nature, the needs of indigence, and mortality of life.

One should consider with fear what Job says of Behemoth-Leviathan: "He shall strew gold under him like mire." Through knowledge, temptation easily leads to ruin. "You will be like God, knowing good and evil." Wherefore some men want to search beyond the way of nature, that is, beyond contingent matters. Concerning the levels of pride, blessed Bernard says that the primary vice is inquisitiveness which brought about the fall of Lucifer. By this, too, Adam fell. The hunger for knowledge must be changed: wisdom and holiness must be preferred to it.

Someone or something whispered that they could become as gods--that they could cease directing their lives to their Creator and taking all their delights as uncovenanted mercies, as "accidents" (in the logical sense) which arose in the course of a life directed not to those delights but to the adoration of God. As a young man wants a regular allowance from his father which he can count on as his own, within which he makes his own plans (and rightly, for his father is after all a fellow creature) so they desired to be on their own, to take care for their own future, to plan for pleasure and for security, to have a meum from which, no doubt, they would pay some reasonable tribute to God in the way of time, attention, and love, but which nevertheless, was theirs not His. They wanted, as we say, to "call their souls their own". But that means to live a lie, for our souls are not, in fact, our own. They wanted some corner in the universe of which they could say to God, "This is our business, not yours." But there is no such corner. They wanted to be nouns, but they were, and eternally must be, mere adjectives.

Some people think the fall of man had something to do with sex, but that is a mistake. (The story in the Book of Genesis rather suggests that some corruption in our sexual nature followed the fall and was its result, not its cause.) What Satan put into the heads of our remote ancestors was the idea that they could 'be like gods'—could set up on their own as if they had created themselves—be their own masters—invent some sort of happiness for themselves outside God, apart from God. And out of that hopeless attempt has come nearly all that we call human history—money, poverty, ambition, war, prostitution, classes, empires, slavery—the long terrible story of man trying to find something other than God which will make him happy.

Now the tempter's words would not have caused the tempted pair to sin had not their greed abetted the tempter. And even if the tempter had not come, the Tree with all its beauty would have caused them a struggle with their greed. In other words, they used the serpent's counsel as an excuse, for it was their own greed, which conformed with the serpent's counsel and went beyond it, that brought harm upon them.

To us light must be henceforward the dark thing—the thing of which we cannot speak. To us, as to Milton's devils in Pandemonium, it is darkness that is visible. The human race, according to religion, fell once, and in falling gained knowledge of good and of evil. Now we have fallen a second time, and only the knowledge of evil remains to us.

(36) What is the meaning of the expression, "Ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil?" (#Ge 3:5). Whence was it that the serpent found the plural word "gods," when there is only one true God, and when this is the first time that he names him? But perhaps this arises from there having been in him a certain prescient wisdom, by which he now declared the notion of the multitude of gods which was at a future time to prevail amongst men; and, perhaps, history now relates this correctly at its first being advanced not by any rational being, nor by any creature of the higher class, but as having derived its origin from the most virulent and vile of beasts and serpents, since other similar creatures lie hid under the earth, and their lurking places are in the holes and fissures of the earth. Moreover, it is the inseparable sign of a being endowed with reason to look upon God as essentially one being, but it is the mark of a beast to imagine that there are many gods, and these too devoid of reason, and who can scarcely be said with propriety to have any existence at all. Moreover, the devil proceeds with great art, speaking by the mouth of the serpent. For not only is there in the Divinity the knowledge of good and evil, but there is also an approval of what is good and a repudiation of what is evil; but he does not speak of either of these feelings because they were useful, but only suggested the mere knowledge of the two contrary things, namely, of good and evil. In the second place, the expression, "as gods," in the plural number, is in this place not used inconsiderately, but in order to give the idea of there being both a bad and a good God. And these are of a twofold quality. Therefore it is suitable to the notion of particular gods to have a knowledge of contrary things; but the Supreme Cause is above all others.

Temperance, therefore, is what cuts off desires. God commanded that this be held by the first humans, saying: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, you shall not eat; and you shall not touch it, lest you die. And because it was not retained, therefore the transgressors of excellent virtue became exiles from paradise, and devoid of immortality. This Law teaches it, and infuses it into the affections of all.

In paradise, rebellion certainly began in the soul. There began the process of giving consent to breaking the commandment. This is why the serpent said, "You shall be as gods." But the whole man committed the sin. It was then that the flesh was made sinful flesh, whose faults could be healed only by the One who came in the likeness of sinful flesh.

Through [Christ] a pattern of life has been given us, that is to say, a sure path by which we may come to God. For we who have fallen through pride could only return to God through humility. Thus was it said to the first creature of our race: "Taste, and you shall be as God." As I was saying, our Savior has himself condescended to exemplify in his own person that humility which is the path over which we have to travel on our return to God. For "he did not think it robbery to be equal to God but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave." Hence, the Word through whom all things in the beginning were made was created man.

WHO EATS. AND THE EYES OF BOTH WERE OPENED. "To what? If not to lusting after each other, to the penalty of sin conceived in the flesh's own death, so that now the body would not only be an animal one, which, if they kept obedience, could be changed into a better spiritual state without death, but now the body of death, in which the law in the members would oppose the law of the mind." For they were not created with closed eyes, and they were not groping and wandering blind in the paradise of delights. This is like the passage in the Gospel when it spoke of those two, one of whom was Cleopas, that when the Lord broke bread for them, their eyes were opened, and they recognized him whom they had not recognized by the way: certainly not walking with closed eyes, but unable to recognize him. To this end, therefore, the eyes of the first humans were opened, to what they were not previously open, although they were open to other things.

The woman, consenting to the diabolic temptation, desired knowledge and excellence after the manner of God, and desired no less to experience the sweetness of the forbidden tree; and at length she fell into transgression of the precept. Nor content with this, by offering the fruit of the forbidden tree, she led the man, who, unwilling to grieve his delights, did not correct the woman, but rather gave consent to her evil persuasion; and by tasting the offered fruit, he became a transgressor of the divine commandment.

Since from the first principle there had been given to man a twofold sense and appetite with respect to the twofold book and with respect to the twofold good, so that according to the freedom of the will man could turn to either, the woman, having heard the exterior suggestion of the serpent, did not have recourse to the interior book, which renders itself legible to the right judgment of reason, but kept her sense fixed upon the exterior book and began to occupy herself with the exterior good. And because her sense did not approach the infallible truth, her appetite began to turn toward the mutable good. She therefore desired what the devil promised, and thus she consented to do what he suggested. By desiring excellent knowledge, therefore, she was raised up into pride; and raised up into pride, by this very thing she was enticed to gluttony; and through this she was thirdly cast down by disobedience. The first was in the mind, the second in sensuality, the third in action.

And just as the temptation, beginning from the lower part, reached all the way to the highest, since from hearing through desire it came to consent, so conversely the disorder, beginning from the higher part, reached all the way to the lowest and produced one consummated sin, which in human nature is the beginning of all sin and the origin of evils.

For the woman, having been enticed, enticed the man, who, similarly turned toward the exterior book and toward the mutable good, esteeming too highly the companionship of the woman and the solace of her society, was unwilling either to correct the woman or to grieve his own delights. And since he ought to have corrected her and did not correct her, therefore the sin of the woman is imputed to him. But because he was unwilling to grieve his own delights by repelling the woman from himself, he began to love himself excessively, and through this, withdrawing from divine friendship, he fell into gluttony and disobedience.

The transgression of the precept was therefore common to both, although from different causes; in both, however, namely in the man and the woman, there was a disordering from the highest to the lowest, because first in the mind or in reason, then in sensuality, and lastly in deed. For each was prostrated through disobedience and enticed through gluttony, because each was raised up in pride: the woman indeed by desiring and pursuing what she had not yet received, the man by excessively loving and prizing what he already had; whence the woman believed she would be exalted by eating, but Adam, thinking himself something great and dear to God, believed he would be punished less severely. For he had not yet experienced the rigor of divine severity.

And thus each, while inordinately raising himself above himself, fell miserably below himself, from the state of innocence and grace to the state of guilt and misery.

One of the hermits said, 'Unless you first hate, you cannot love. Unless you hate sin, you cannot live sinlessly. As it is written, "Depart from evil and do good" (Ps. 37:27). But perseverance is needed for this. Adam, even though he was in Paradise, disobeyed God's command while Job, who was living on a dung hill, kept it. It seems that God requires from us a good intention, that is, that we should fear him always.'

Eve is the first to teach us that sight, taste and the other senses, when used without moderation, distract the heart from its remembrance of God. So long as she did not look with longing on the forbidden tree, she was able to keep God's commandment carefully in mind. She was still covered by the wings of divine love and thus was ignorant of her own nakedness. But after she had looked at the tree with longing, touched it with ardent desire and then tasted its fruit with intense sensuality, she at once felt drawn to physical intercourse, and, being naked, she gave way to passion. All her desire was now to enjoy what was immediately present to her senses, and through the pleasant appearance of the fruit she involved Adam in her fall.

For it says, "The woman saw that the Tree was good to eat, and was delightful to the eyes; and the Tree was enticing to look upon, and so she took some of its fruit and ate." [ Gen. 3:6 ] Now if she was overcome by the Tree's beauty and by desire for its fruit, she was not overcome by the counsel that had entered her ear, seeing that she was defeated by the greed which issued from within herself.

Seeing that a commandment had been laid down for the tempted pair, it was appropriate that the tempter should come momentarily. Now because God had given to Adam everything inside and outside Paradise through Grace, requiring nothing in return, either for his creation, or for the glory in which He had clothed him, nevertheless out of Justice He held back one tree from him to whom He had given, in Grace, everything in Paradise and on earth, in the air and in the seas. For when God created Adam, He did not make him mortal, nor did He fashion him as immortal; this was so that Adam himself, either through keeping the commandment, or by transgressing it might acquire from this one of the trees which ever outcome he wanted.

God had created the Tree of Life and hidden it from Adam and Eve, first, so that it should not, with its beauty, stir up conflict with them and so double their struggle, and also because it was inappropriate that they should be observant of the commandment of Him who cannot be seen for the sake of a reward that was there before their eyes.

Even though God had given them everything else out of Grace, He wished to confer on them, out of Justice, the immortal life which is granted through eating of the Tree of Life. He therefore laid down this commandment. Not that it was a large commandment, commensurate with the superlative reward that was in preparation for them; no, He only withheld from them a single tree, just so that they might be subject to a commandment. But He gave them the whole of Paradise, so that they would not feel any compulsion to transgress the law.

Because a tempter was required, as I mentioned, Satan was not allowed to have one of the Watchers, or one of the Seraphim or Cherubim, sent to Adam for this purpose; nor was Satan allowed to come to Adam in the Garden in human appearance, or in the divine appearance in which he came to our Lord on the mountain. [ [Matt. 4:1-11 par.] ] Nor did any of the huge and renowned animals, such as Behemoth or Leviathan, come; nor did any of the other animals, or any of the ritually clean cattle, lest some excuse might be found by [or for] the transgressors of the commandment. Instead, a mere serpent was allowed to come to them, which, even if it was astute, was nevertheless utterly despised and despicable.

Moreover, when the serpent came, it did not do so performing any signs, or even fashioning some false apparition; no, it came just by itself in its mean state, with downcast eyes seeing that it was unable to look upon the radiance of her who was being tempted by this creature. Out of fear it did not go to Adam, but went instead to Eve, in order quickly to get her to eat of the Tree from which she had been told not to eat. And this was when she had not yet tasted of the thousands and ten thousands of other trees that had been granted her. And the reason for her not having tasted them was not because she was fasting; rather, hunger had not yet gained any hold over her, for she had only just been created at that very time.

The entire reason the serpent was not prevented from coming hastily was because the serpent's very haste worked against the serpent. For it was the moment that Eve had been created, and she did not yet know what hunger was; and up to now she had not been tormented by any struggle over the Tree's beauty. So, because she was not hungry and was not struggling with the Tree, the serpent was not prevented from becoming a tempter.

If she had vanquished it in a momentary fight, in a struggle lasting but a short time, the serpent--and he who was in the serpent--would still have received the punishment which in the event they received, while she and her husband would have eaten of the Tree of Life and lived forever; with the promised life that they would have acquired through Justice, they would also have had, through Justice, everything that previously they had been given through Grace.

So the tempter made haste to come, and was not prevented. This was so that they might realize that he was the tempter, by the fact that the tempter came at the same time as the commandment, and in this way they would be wary of his deceitfulness. He who was unable to provide himself with even a small reputation came along and gave them momentous counsel.

Satan, who was in the serpent, spoke through the serpent to the woman: "Did God really say that you should not eat of any of the trees of Paradise. " [ Gen. 3:1 ] It is right that we should realize that, had they been commanded not to eat of any of the trees, as the serpent said, it would have been a big commandment. Whereas in fact they were commanded exactly the opposite, as it were, no commandment at all seeing that it was so small and had been given only temporarily, until the tempter had gone away from them.

Now Eve replied, saying to the serpent, "From the fruits of the trees in Paradise we may eat, but from the fruits of the Tree in the middle of Paradise He told us not to eat and not to approach it, lest we die. " [ Gen. 3:2,3:3 ] . The serpent, and he who was in the serpent, having heard that all the trees of Paradise had been provided for fruit, and only one had been withheld from them, supposed themselves to be wrapped in shame, seeing that there was no opportunity for counseling disobedience.

Accordingly, the tempter observed the commandment of God the giver of commandments, how not only had they been forbidden to eat of it, but they were not to approach it at all; and he realized that God had forewarned them away from seeing the Tree, lest they be captivated by its beauty. So, luring Eve to look at it, he said, "It is not the case that you will die, for God knows that the day you eat of these fruits your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil. " [ Gen. 3:4,3:5 ] Now Eve omitted to look carefully at the serpent's words, at how the tempter had said exactly the opposite of what had been uttered by God; and she failed to answer him back and say, "How can my eyes be opened, seeing that they are not closed?" and "How will I know the difference between good and evil by eating the fruit, seeing that I already know this before eating it?" But she neglected everything that she should have said in opposition to the serpent, and, just as the serpent had desired, she raised her eyes from the serpent in front of her and gazed at the Tree she had been commanded not to approach. Now the serpent kept quiet, for it already perceived her guilt. For it was not so much the counsel that had entered her ear that lured her on to eat of the Tree, but rather her gaze, which she had focused on the Tree, enticed her to pluck and eat some of its fruit.

She could very well have said to the serpent, "If I cannot see, how is it that I see everything that is to be seen? And if I do not know the difference between good and evil, how could I discern whether your counsel is good or evil? How would I know that divinity was good and the opening of the eyes an excellent thing, and whence would I recognize that death is evil? But all this is available to me; so why have you come to me? Your coming to us bears witness that we possess these very things; for with the sight that I have, and with the ability to distinguish what is good from what is evil that I possess, I will test your counsel. If I already have the things which you have promised, where is all this cunning of yours which has failed to hide your deception?"

She did not say these things whereby she might have defeated the serpent, but instead she fixed her gaze on the Tree, thereby hastening her own defeat. Thus, following her desire and enticed by the divinity which the serpent had promised her, she ate furtively, away from her husband. Only subsequently did she give it to her husband, and he ate with her. Because she had believed the serpent she ate first, imagining that she would return clothed in divinity to her husband whom she had left as a woman. She hastily ate before her husband so that she might become head over her head, and that she might be giving orders to him from whom she received orders, seeing that she had become senior in divinity to Adam to whom she was junior in humanity.

When she had eaten, she neither grew nor shrank; nor did she acquire enlightenment. For she did not receive the divinity she had been looking to, nor did she find the enlightenment that brings one to Paradise. She took the fruit to her husband and, with many entreaties, got him to eat it--though it is not written that she entreated him. [ Gen. 3:6 ]

Having once eaten, Eve did not die as God had said, nor did she find divinity, as the serpent had said. For had she been exposed, Adam would have been afraid and would not have eaten, in which case, even though he would not have been guilty in that he did not eat, yet he would not have been victorious either, seeing that he would not have been tempted. It would have been the exposing of his wife that would have restrained him from eating rather than love for, or fear of, Him who gave the commandment. It was so that Adam might for a moment be tempted by Eve's blandishments--just as she had been by the counsel of the serpent--that she had approached and eaten, but had not been exposed.

The words of the tempter would not have caused those two to be tempted to sin if their avarice had not been so helpful to the tempter. Even if the tempter had not come, the tree itself, by its beauty, would have caused them a great struggle due to their avarice. Their avarice then was the reason that they followed the counsel of the serpent. The avarice of Adam and Eve was far more injurious to them than the counsel of the serpent.

She hastened to eat before her husband that she might become head over her head, that she might become the one to give command to that one by whom she was to be commanded and that she might be older in divinity than that one who was older than she in humanity.

Did he expect to find a fossil Eve with a fossil apple inside her? Did he suppose that the ages would have spared for him a complete skeleton of Adam attached to a slightly faded fig-leaf? ... Science never said that there could have been no Fall. There might have been ten Falls, one on top of the other, and the thing would have been quite consistent with everything that we know from physical science. Humanity might have grown morally worse for millions of centuries, and the thing would in no way have contradicted the principle of Evolution.

If it is not true that a divine being fell, then we can only say that one of the animals went entirely off its head. In neither case can we really argue very much from the body of man simply considered as the body of an innocent and healthy animal. His body has got too much mixed up with his soul.

A man and woman are put in a garden on condition that they do not eat one fruit: they eat it, and lose their joy in all the fruits of the earth.

This great idea, then, is the backbone of all folk-lore—the idea that all happiness hangs on one thin veto; all positive joy depends on one negative. ... It is surely obvious that all ethics ought to be taught to this fairy-tale tune; that, if one does the thing forbidden, one imperils all the things provided.

For clothes are very literally vestments, and man wears them because he is a priest. It is true that even as an animal he is here different from the animals. Nakedness is not nature to him; it is not his life but rather his death; even in the vulgar sense of his death of cold. But clothes are worn for dignity or decency or decoration where they are not in any way wanted for warmth. It would sometimes appear that they are valued for ornament before they are valued for use. It would almost always appear that they are felt to have some connection with decorum. Conventions of this sort vary a great deal with various times and places; and there are some who cannot get over this reflection, and for whom it seems a sufficient argument for letting all conventions slide. They never tire of repeating, with simple wonder, that dress is different in the Cannibal Islands and in Camden Town; they cannot get any further and throw up the whole idea of decency in despair. They might as well say that because there have been hats of a good many different shapes, and some rather eccentric shapes, therefore hats do not matter or do not exist. They would probably add that there is no such thing as sunstroke or going bald. Men have felt everywhere that certain forms were necessary to fence off and protect certain private things from contempt or coarse misunderstanding; and the keeping of those forms, whatever they were, made for dignity and mutual respect. The fact that they mostly refer, more or less remotely, to the relations of the sexes illustrates the two facts that must be put at the very beginning of the record of the race. The first is the fact that original sin is really original. Not merely in theology but in history it is a thing rooted in the origins. Whatever else men have believed, they have all believed that there is something the matter with mankind. This sense of sin has made it impossible to be natural and have no clothes, just as it has made it impossible to be natural and have no laws.

The mediæval mind turned centrally upon the pivot of Free Will. In their social system the mediævals were too much PARTI-PER-PALE, as their heralds would say, too rigidly cut up by fences and quarterings of guild or degree. But in their moral philosophy they always thought of man as standing free and doubtful at the cross-roads in a forest. While they clad and bound the body and (to some extent) the mind too stiffly and quaintly for our taste, they had a much stronger sense than we have of the freedom of the soul. For them the soul always hung poised like an eagle in the heavens of liberty. Many of the things that strike a modern as most fantastic came from their keen sense of the power of choice.

For instance, the greatest of the Schoolmen devotes folios to the minute description of what the world would have been like if Adam had refused the apple; what kings, laws, babies, animals, planets would have been in an unfallen world. So intensely does he feel that Adam might have decided the other way that he sees a complete and complex vision of another world, a world that now can never be.

Those who have been tricked into taking poison offset its harmful effect by another drug. The remedy, moreover, just like the poison, has to enter the system, so that its remedial effect may thereby spread through the whole body. Similarly, having tasted the poison, that is the fruit, that dissolved our nature, we were necessarily in need of something to reunite it. Such a remedy had to enter into us, so that it might by its counteraction undo the harm the body had already encountered from the poison. And what is this remedy? Nothing else than the body that proved itself superior to death and became the source of our life.

That the Lord then was manifestly coming to His own things, and was sustaining them by means of that creation which is supported by Himself, and was making a recapitulation of that disobedience which had occurred in connection with a tree, through the obedience which was [exhibited by Himself when He hung] upon a tree, [the effects] also of that deception being done away with, by which that virgin Eve, who was already espoused to a man, was unhappily misled,-was happily announced, through means of the truth [spoken] by the angel to the Virgin Mary, who was [also espoused] to a man. For just as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had transgressed His word; so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should sustain God, being obedient to His word. And if the former did disobey God, yet the latter was persuaded to be obedient to God, in order that the Virgin Mary might become the patroness of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way the sin of the first created man receives amendment by the correction of the First-begotten, and the coming of the serpent is conquered by the harmlessness of the dove, those bonds being unloosed by which we had been fast bound to death.

True it is that "evil converse corrupts good behavior." [ I Cor 15:33 ] Why was it, after all, that before that wicked demon's advice she entertained no such idea, had no eyes for the tree, nor noticed its attractiveness? Because she feared God's direction and the punishment likely to follow from tasting the fruit; now, how ever, when she was deceived by this evil creature into thinking that not only would they not come to any harm from this but would even be equal to God, then evidently hope of gaining the promised reward drove her to taste it. Not content to remain within her own proper limits, but considering the enemy and foe of her salvation (129d) to be more trustworthy than God's words, she learned shortly afterwards through her own experience the lethal effect of such advice and the disaster brought on them from tasting the fruit. The text says, remember, "She saw the tree was good for eating, pleasing for the eyes to behold and attractive to contemplate," and she reasoned with herself, probably from the devil's deceit which he proposed to her through the serpent: If the tree is good for eating, can so delight the eyes and has some indefinable attractiveness about it, while tasting it provides us with the highest esteem, and we will have honor equal to the Creator, why should we not taste it? Do you see how the devil led her captive, handicapped her reasoning, and caused her to set her thoughts on goals beyond her real capabilities, in order that she might be puffed up with empty hopes (130a) and lose her hold on the advantages already accorded her? "She took some of its fruit," the text says, "and ate it; she gave it to her husband also, and they both ate it. Their eyes were opened, and they realized they were naked." [ Gen 3:6, Gen 3:7 ] O woman, what have you done? You have not only followed that deadly counsel literally and trampled on the law imposed on you by God, spurning his instruction and treating it with such displeasure as to be discontented with such great enjoyment, but you have also presumed to take fruit from the one tree which the Lord bade you not to lay hold of, you put faith in the words of the serpent, you regarded its advice worthy of greater heed than the instruction given you by the Creator, and have been ensnared in such awful deception as to be incapable of any claim to excuse. Surely you're not, after all, of the same nature as the one who offered you the advice? He happened in fact to be one of those under your control, (l30b) one of the servants placed by providence under your authority. Such being the case, why did you disgrace yourself, departing from the one for whom you were created, as whose helpmate you were made, in whose dignity you had equal share, one with him in being and one in language why then did you agree to enter into converse with the serpent, and by means of this creature accept the advice of the devil, which was plainly at variance with the Creator's injunction, without being turned aside from such evil intent, but rather presuming to taste the fruit through hope of what had been promised? Well and good, then: so you cast yourself into such an abyss and robbed yourself of your preeminent dignity. Why did you make your husband a partner in this grievous disaster, why prove to be the temptress of the person whose help mate you were intended to be, and why for a tiny morsel alienate him along with yourself from the favor of God? What excess of folly (130c) led you to such heights of presumption? Wasn't it sufficient for you to pass your life without care or concern, clad in a body yet free of any bodily needs? to enjoy everything in the garden except for one tree? to have all visible things under your own authority and to exercise control over them all? Did you instead, deceived as you were by vain hopes set your heart on reaching the very pinnacle of power? On that account you will discover through experience itself that not only will you fail to achieve that goal but you will rob your self and your husband of everything already given you, you will fall into such depths of remorse that you will regret your failed intentions while that wicked demon, responsible for concocting that deadly plan, will mock and insult you for falling victim to him and incurring the same fate as he. I mean just as he had ideas above his station, (l30d) was carried away to a degree beyond what was granted him, and so fell from heaven to earth, in just the same way did you have in mind to proceed, and by your transgression of the command were brought to the punishment of death, giving free rein to your own envy, as some sage has said: "By the devil's envy death entered the world." [ Wis 2:24 ] Our text says, "She gave it to her husband also, and they both ate it. Their eyes were opened." Great was the man's indifference, too: even though like him she was human and his wife as well, still he should have kept God's law intact and given it preference before her improper greed, and not joined her as a partner in her fall nor deprived himself of such benefits on account of a brief pleasure, offending his benefactor who had also shown him so much loving kindness and had (13la) regaled him with a life so free of pain and relieved of all distress. After all, were you not free to enjoy everything else in the garden in generous measure? Why did you not choose for yourself to keep the command that was so easy? Instead, you probably listened to the promise contained in the deadly advice coming from your wife, and buoyed up in your turn with hope you readily shared in the food. As a result you incur the penalty from each other, and experience teaches you not to place greater importance on the wicked demon's advice than on God. "She gave it to her husband also, and they both ate it. Their eyes were opened, and they realized they were naked." At this point an important question arises, which I promised you, my dear people, yesterday to deal with. What I mean is (13lb) that someone could ask what particular quality was it which that tree had that resulted in the opening of their eyes from eating it, and why is it called the knowledge of good and evil. Wait a while, if you don't mind: I want to discuss this, too, with you for a moment and teach you, dear people, that, if we wanted to welcome the contents of Sacred Scripture with grateful hearts, nothing of what is said there would seem difficult. What I mean is that it wasn't the eating from the tree that opened their eyes: they could see even before eating. Instead, the eating from this tree was the symptom of their disobedience and the breaking of the command given by God; and through their guilt they consequently divested themselves of the glory surrounding them, rendering themselves unworthy of such wonderful esteem. Hence Scripture takes up the point in its customary way with the words, (131c) "They both ate. Their eyes were opened, and they realized they were naked;" because of the Fall, they were stripped of grace from above, and they felt the sense of their obvious nakedness so that through the shame that overcame them they might know precisely what peril they had been led into by breaking the Lord's command. You see, before this they had enjoyed such confidence and were not aware that they happened to be naked (actually, they were not really naked: the glory from above garbed them better than any garment), whereas after eating that is, after transgression of what had been commanded they fell into such baseness that they then looked for some covering through not being able to bear their shame. You see, transgression of the command entered the scene and snatched away that novel and remarkable garment I mean the glory and favor from above (131d) enveloping them and it both lent them an awareness of their nakedness and also clad them in unspeakable shame.

Behold, then, the beginning of shame is the lust of the belly, and well hath the blessed Apostle also called it thus, saying, "The woman saw that the tree was fair, and that it was a thing for which the eyes lusted, and that it was desirable to look upon; and she took of its fruit, and she ate and gave also to her husband with her, and he did eat." Thus thou mayest see that the lust of the belly was the beginning of their common sin, and of the first transgression of the commandment, and that thereby all sins and all punishments were brought in and came upon us; for as envy was the beginning of wickedness with Satan, so also was the belly the beginning of the transgression of the commandment with the house of Adam. And through it sins came in, and through it all penalties followed; it was the beginning of pains and sicknesses, through it the pains of childbirth entered in, through it was the earth cursed, and it brought forth briars and brambles, it hath made us aliens from the pleasures of Paradise, it hath cast us out as it were into exile in a cursed land, through it we have become slaves unto devils, through its dominion over us we serve in the bondage of Satan, through it evil spirits sport with us and laugh at us, it hath brought in death which dissolveth and scattereth our frames, through it this fair and beautiful image hath been made hideous and loathsome, it hath fed us with the bread of pain, and it hath collected for us food by the sweat of our face. Now the lust of the belly is a senseless and blind thing. It sought to eat, and yet was deprived of food; it lusted after pleasures, and destroyed the gratification and delight of Paradise, for though lusting to eat, it knew not how to eat; it possessed not patience, for the nature of this lust is to be hasty and impatient, and it made haste and plucked one fruit, and was henceforth deprived of the table which was full of all the luxuries of Paradise.

It was not the fruit which Eve ate that brought forth death, but it was the lust thereof which brought forth death; for if she had kept the law, and had not eaten with lust at that time, how many times could she have eaten of it afterwards, and not been blamed, provided that she took it unto herself in the ordinary way like that of other trees? And she drew nigh unto it, for it is written that she lusted, and then ate, and for this reason she was condemned. And what then was the nature of this fruit which was able to produce death, together with all other wickedness? Now, behold, according to what many say, and according also to the slight indication which the Book itself giveth unto us, the fruit which Eve ate was of the fig-tree, and it is manifest that the nature of the fig-tree is not to produce death; therefore it was lust which gave birth unto death, which it hath in all generations produced for man. For the root of death is lust, and the root of lust is carnal union, and for this reason all those who are born of carnal union are moved by lust, and are subject unto death, except One who was not born of carnal union; for this reason He was free from the motion of lust, and therefore He appeared superior to natural death, which, although He took it upon Himself, was voluntary and not natural. So then the nature of food is not reprehensible, although it is blameworthy when lust eateth it.

If someone asks, therefore, why God allowed man to be tempted when he foreknew that man would yield to the tempter, I cannot sound the depths of divine wisdom, and I confess that the solution is far beyond my powers. There may be a hidden reason, made known only to those who are better and holier than I, not because of their merits but simply by the grace of God. But insofar as God gives me the ability to understand or allows me to speak, I do not think that a man would deserve great praise if he had been able to live a good life for the simple reason that nobody tempted him to live a bad one. For by nature he would have it in his power to will not to yield to the tempter, with the help of him, of course, "who resists the proud and gives his grace to the humble." Why, then, would God not allow a man to be tempted, although he foreknew he would yield? For the man would do the deed by his own free will and thus incur guilt, and he would have to undergo punishment according to God's justice to be restored to right order. Thus God would make known his will to a proud soul for the instruction of the saints in ages to come. For wisely he uses even bad wills of souls when they perversely abuse their nature, which is good.

It was not in order to see outward things that "their eyes were opened," because they could see such things already. It was in order that they might see the difference between the good they had lost and the evil into which they had fallen. That is why the tree is called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They had been forbidden to touch it because if they did it would bring on the experience of this distinction. It takes the experience of the pains of sickness to open our eyes to the pleasantness of health.

As soon as our first parents had disobeyed God's commandment, they were immediately deprived of divine grace and were ashamed of their nakedness. They covered themselves with fig leaves, which perhaps were the first thing noticed by the troubled pair. The parts covered remained unchanged except that previously they occasioned no shame. They felt for the first time a movement of disobedience in their flesh, as though the punishment were meant to fit the crime of their own disobedience to God. The fact is that the soul, which had taken perverse delight in its own liberty and disdained the service of God, was now deprived of its original mastery over the body. Because it had deliberately deserted the Lord who was over it, it no longer bent to its will the servant below it, being unable to hold the flesh completely in subjection as would always have been the case, if only the soul had remained subject to God. From this moment on, then, the flesh began to lust against the spirit. With this rebellion we are born, just as we are doomed to die and because of the first sin to bear, in our members and vitiated nature, either the battle with or defeat by the flesh.

Then they saw that they were naked by perverted eyes. Their original simplicity, signified by the term nakedness, now seemed to be something to be ashamed of. And so that they might no longer be simple, they made aprons for themselves from the leaves of the fig tree, as if to cover their private parts, that is, to cover their simplicity, of which that cunning pride was ashamed. The leaves of the fig tree signify a certain itching, if this is correctly said in the case of incorporeal things, which the mind suffers in wondrous ways from the desire and pleasure of lying. As a result those who love to joke are even called "salty" in Latin. For in jokes pretense plays a primary role.

And indeed, the fig tree sometimes in Scriptures insinuates the sweetness of heavenly love, whence it is written: "He who keeps the fig tree eats its fruit; and he who guards his master will be honored" (Prov. XXVII); but because our first parents, confused by the guilt of transgression, made for themselves coverings of fig leaves, the fig tree can not incongruously signify the sweetened habit of sinning in humanity...

When they realized that they were naked, they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves. "The rational soul felt shame about the bestial movement in the members of its body, and it instilled this shame, not only because it felt this sensation where it had never felt anything like it before; but also because that shameful movement came from the transgression of the commandment. For there it sensed the grace with which it was previously clothed, when in its nakedness it did not suffer anything improper. Finally, in that disturbance, they rushed to the fig leaves, which they perhaps found first in their confusion: they sewed loincloths, that is, girdles; and since they lost what was to be glorified, they covered what was shameful. Nor do I think they considered anything in those leaves suitable to cover their now prurient members, but by a hidden instinct they were compelled in that disturbance so that even the signification of such a punishment might be made clear to those unaware, which would convict the doer and teach the reader from what was written." The mystery of this tree under which the Lord saw Nathanael still placed, S. Ambrose briefly but clearly explained by saying: "Blessed are those who tie their horses under the vine and the olive, dedicating the course of their labors to the face of joy. As for me, the fig still, that is, the prurient lust of world delights, shades the lowly, fragile to work, soft to use, barren of fruit." And elsewhere he says: "What is more serious," he says, "is that Adam girded himself with this interpretation where he should have girded himself more with the fruit of chastity, for in the loins where we are girded it is said there are some seeds of generation, and therefore Adam was wrongly girded there with useless leaves, where he marked not the fruit of future generations, but certain sins."

The man and the woman immediately after their fault felt the penalty of rebellion and shame in the flesh; and therefore to cover their shameful parts they made for themselves loincloths. Since each parent, by being proud in mind and tasting in the flesh, was disobedient to their superior, by the just judgment of God it came about that their inferior became disobedient to them, especially with respect to those parts according to which there is the union of both sexes, which are the members serving the generative power. And because this was in them not from nature but from their own fault, therefore they were ashamed and covered themselves.

Once Eve had enticed Adam and gotten him to eat, Scripture says that "the eyes of the two of them were opened and they knew that they were naked." [ Gen. 3:7 ] So their eyes were opened, not that they might become like God, as the serpent had said, but that they might see their own exposure, just as the enemy had hoped. For their eyes had thus been both open and closed: open, in that they could see everything; but closed, in that they did not see either the Tree of Life or their own exposure.

The enemy was envious for this reason too, because they surpassed everything on earth in possessing glory and reason, and eternal life which is provided by the Tree of Life was promised to them alone. Thus the enemy was envious of Adam and Eve both for what they had and for what they were to receive; accordingly, he plotted against them and in the course of a momentary struggle he took from them what they should not have lost even if it meant a great struggle.

For had the serpent been rejected, along with the sin, they would have eaten of the Tree of Life, and the Tree of Knowledge would not have been withheld from them any longer; from the one they would have acquired infallible knowledge, and from the other they would have received immortal life. They would have acquired divinity in humanity; and had they thus acquired infallible knowledge and immortal life they would have done so in this body.

Thus by what it promised, the serpent annulled what they were to have had: it made them think that they would receive this by transgressing the commandment, thus effecting that they would not receive it as a result of keeping the commandment. It withheld divinity from them by means of the divinity which it promised them, and it brought about that those, to whom it had promised enlightenment from the Tree of Knowledge, should not have their eyes illumined by the Tree of Life, as promised.

Now had they been willing to repent after transgressing the commandment, even though they would not have received what they had possessed prior to their transgression, nevertheless they would have escaped from the curses pronounced over the earth and over themselves. For the whole reason for God's delay in coming down to them was in case they might rebuke one another and so, when the Judge did come to them, they might ask for mercy. The serpent's arrival was not delayed, so that their temptation at the beautiful sight of the Tree might not be too great. The Judge, on the other hand, did delay in coming to them, in order to give them an opportunity to prepare a plea. However, the haste on the part of the tempter did not help them, even though this haste was designed to help them; nor did they profit from the Judge's delay, even though His delay, too, was intended for that very purpose.

The case of Adam, however, had no analogy with this, but was altogether different. For, having been beguiled by another under the pretext of immortality, he is immediately seized with terror, and hides himself; not as if he were able to escape from God; but, in a state of confusion at having transgressed His command, he feels unworthy to appear before and to hold converse with God. Now, "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom;" the sense of sin leads to repentance, and God bestows His compassion upon those who are penitent. For [Adam] showed his repentance by his conduct, through means of the girdle [which he used], covering himself with fig-leaves, while there were many other leaves, which would have irritated his body in a less degree. He, however, adopted a dress conformable to his disobedience, being awed by the fear of God; and resisting the erring, the lustful propensity of his flesh (since he had lost his natural disposition and child-like mind, and had come to the knowledge of evil things), he girded a bridle of continence upon himself and his wife, fearing God, and waiting for His coming, and indicating, as it were, some such thing [as follows]: Inasmuch as, he says, I have by disobedience lost that robe of sanctity which I had from the Spirit, I do now also acknowledge that I am deserving of a covering of this nature, which affords no gratification, but which gnaws and frets the body. And he would no doubt have retained this clothing for ever, thus humbling himself, if God, who is merciful, had not clothed them with tunics of skins instead of fig-leaves.

Consider, I ask you dearly beloved, what height they had fallen from and how the devil's advice had cast them into a deep abyss. Whereas, you see, they had been clothed in such glory, now they stitch together fig leaves and make themselves skirts. This is the advantage to be gained from the devil's deceit, this is the scope of his advice not merely to fail to provide greater benefits but to render us naked and devoid of those we have. Since therefore such a pretext of eating led to disobedience, Scripture accordingly says, "They ate, and their eyes were opened," referring not to the eyes of the senses but to their mental awareness. You see once they disobeyed what had been commanded, they were now made to become aware of things that previously they had no awareness of on account of the benevolence of the Lord shown to them. So when you hear that "Their eyes were opened," understand it in the sense that he saw to it that they would now experience their nakedness and the loss of the glory they enjoyed before eating. To be sure that this is the way with Scripture, listen to what it says elsewhere as well: when Sarah's maid ran away from service and got lost, she flung her child down next to a log and from a distance she thought about his approaching demise in these words, "God opened the eyes" [ Gen 21:19 ] of Hagar, not because she could not see before then but because he awakened her mind. Do you see that the word "opened" refers not to our bodily eyes but to mental awareness? We would make the same point in regard to the other question that arises at this stage. That is, they ask, Why was it called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? There are, you see, many people bent on controversy who endeavor to maintain that after eating from the tree Adam had knowledge to discriminate between good and evil an opinion of the utmost absurdity. I mean, in view of this and fore seeing it earlier, we dealt with many aspects of the intelligence granted the human being by God, demonstrating it from the imposition of names which he gave to all the animals, the birds and the brute beasts, and the fact that he was endowed with prophetic grace along with this ineffable intelligence lest anyone come up with such an opinion. This person, there fore, who both imposed names and gave vent to that so remarkable prophecy about the woman, as we have already mentioned how could he have been ignorant of what is good and what is evil? I mean, if we admitted that (God forbid), once again would blasphemous references be directed to the Creator. How, after all, could an ignorant per son be commanded that transgression is wrong? This, how ever, is not the case perish the thought; on the contrary, he knew quite well. It was, after all, on that account that God from the outset equipped this creature with independence: if this had not been the case, he ought not have been punished when he broke the command nor considered worthy of praise for keeping it. You see, the fact that he fell under death's sway on account of the fall is clear both from the command itself and from what happened later. Listen, in fact, to the woman in person speaking to the serpent: "From fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden." God said, "You are not to eat, lest you die." It follows that before eating they were in fact not subject to death; if this were not the case, he would not have imposed death on them by way of a penalty after the eating. Who therefore (l32d) could bear with those people who insist on saying that the human being had knowledge of good and evil after eating from the tree, that creature who before such eating was liberally endowed with intelligence, and along with intelligence had been granted also the prophetic gift? How do these two things make sense on the one hand, knowing goats and sheep and all the species of brute beasts, what vegetation was suitable for food and what was harmful, which types to keep away from sedulously and which ones to approach; and, on the other hand, the idea that the human being, this rational creature, should be unaware of what is good and what is evil? But behold, they say, it was Scripture that called it the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I know that, too: but if you are prepared to learn the characteristics of Sacred Scripture, you will know why it gave this name to the tree. You see, it wasn't because it supplied knowledge that it is called that, but because the transgression of the command happened to concern the tree, and from that event knowledge of sin then entered the scene, and shame as well that was why the name was given. It is, after all, the way with Sacred Scripture to name places from the things that happen, wherever it is they happen. So on this basis Sacred Scripture also named the tree of the knowledge of good and evil since transgression and observance of the command concerned the tree. The loving Lord, you see, instructing the human being in the beginning and from the very outset, and wanting to teach him that he has a creator and craftsman who produces all visible realities and shapes him as well, wished to reveal to him his own dominion through this slight command. To make a comparison with a generous master who provides a great home full of wonders for someone's enjoyment: he is prepared to take not the due price but some small part so as in his own interests to protect his title of dominion and to en sure that the person may have precise understanding that he is not owner of the property but enjoys its use out of his grace and beneficence. In just the same way does our Lord entrust everything to the human being, providing him with a way of life in the garden and enjoyment of everything in it; lest he be gradually perverted in his thinking and come to regard visible things as self-sufficient and get inflated ideas of his own importance, he bids him stay away from the one tree, setting a severe penalty for transgression so that he may be aware he is under his dominion and along with everything else is a par taker of his generosity. Since, however, he was guilty of great inadvertence and together with his wife fell into this disaster through transgression of the command given him by tasting of the tree, accordingly it called it the tree of the knowledge of good and evil not because he was ignorant of good and evil before this (he was, after all, not so ignorant, since his wife in conversation with the serpent said, "God said, Do not eat of it lest you die," so that he knew death was the penalty for breaking the command), but because after eating it they were divested of the glory from above and also had experience of their obvious nakedness. This was the reason it called it the knowledge of good and evil, since in connection with it there took place the contest, as you might say, between obedience and disobedience. Have you discovered why it said, "Their eyes were opened, and they realized they were naked"? Do you know why the tree is called the knowledge of good and evil? Consider, after all, how much shame they were eventually seized with after eating it and thus breaking the Lord's command: "They stitched fig leaves together, and made themselves skirts." See the depths of indignity into which they fell from a condition of such great glory. Those who previously passed their life like angels on earth contrive covering for themselves out of fig leaves. Such is the evil that sin is: not only does it deprive us of grace from above, but it also casts us into deep shame and abjection, strips us of goods already be longing to us, and deprives us of all confidence. But in case we make this sermon completely melancholy by going on and on about this sin that consisted of eating of the tree and of the disobedience overwhelming the human being, come now, if you don't mind, let us change the topic from the tree to that other one, from this tree to the tree of the Cross, and let us see what harm the former caused and what good the latter introduced. Rather, it was not the tree that caused the harm, but slothful will and contempt displayed for God's command. The former tree brought death, death entering the scene after the Fall, remember, whereas the latter endowed us with immortality; one drove us from paradise, the other led us up to heaven; the former rendered Adam liable to such a terrible penalty for one transgression, whereas the latter freed us from the countless burdens of our sins and restored to us confidence in the Lord's sight. Do you see the difference between the one tree and the other? do you see the devil's malice, man's indifference, and the lord's loving kindness? Accordingly, let us arm ourselves, I beg you, dear people, with the armor of this life giving tree, and in its power let us do to death deadly passions, as the Apostle also instructs us in these words: "Those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts." [ Gal 5:24 ] 17 What he means is this: people giving themselves completely to Christ have crucified every improper desire affecting the flesh and risking impairment to the soul's whole vitality. Let us too imitate these people and put our bodies on the alert against the tyranny imposed on us by the devil's activity so that even in this present life we may cross this rough and dangerous ocean serenely, put in to the calm haven of God's love, and be deemed worthy to attain the good things promised to those who love him, in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be glory, now and forever, for ages of ages. Amen.

It wasn't the eating from the tree that opened their eyes: they could see even before eating. Instead the eating from this tree was the symptom of their disobedience and the breaking of the command given by God; and through their guilt they consequently divested themselves of the glory surrounding them, rendering themselves unworthy of such wonderful esteem. Hence Scripture takes up the point in its customary way with the words, "They both ate. Their eyes were opened, and they realized they were naked." Because of the fall they were stripped of grace from above, and they felt the sense of their obvious nakedness so that through the shame that overcame them they might know precisely what peril they had been led into by breaking the Lord's command.

I know that some at this point might accuse the Lawgiver and assert that the law is the cause of the fall. We absolutely must oppose that argument. We must plainly argue and demonstrate that God gave the law not because he hated humanity or wanted to mark our nature with shame but because he loved us and cared for us. In order that you learn that the law was given as a means to help, listen to the words of Isaiah: "He gave the law in our support." One who pursues hatred does not give help. Again the prophet declares, "Your word is the lamp guiding my steps and the light for my paths." But one who pursues hatred does not dispel the darkness with his lamp, nor does he provide light to one who is wandering. Solomon says, "The command of the law is the lamp, the light, the life, the reproach and the rule." So the law is not only a help, not only a lamp but also light and life. Therefore these things are not for those who pursue hatred, not for those who will to be lost, but for those who hold out and lift up their hand.

The eyes of sense were then opened, which they had done well to keep shut, that they might not be distracted and hindered from seeing with the eyes of the mind. It was those eyes of the mind which in consequence of sin, as I imagine, were then closed. To that time they had enjoyed the delight of beholding God and his paradise. This twofold kind of vision in us was familiar to our Savior, who said, "For judgment I have come into this world, that those who see not might see and that those who see might be made blind"—meaning by "the eyes that see not" the eyes of the mind, which are enlightened by his teaching; and "the eyes that see," meaning the eyes of sense, which his words render blind.

The Enemy did not contend against the heads of our race with fornication, or with avarice, or with vain-glory, or with the adornment of apparel, or with envy and pride, or with any of the other passions, but only with the lust of the belly, because he saw that it was capable of becoming a leader of all the lusts; for the Tempter was crafty, and he saw which passion was the strongest and foremost in us, and he drew nigh thereunto, and stimulated it, and after that he sowed the seeds of laxity, and after that the seeds of lust, and then fornication also entered in, for immediately "they had eaten, the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked." And it is evident that it was because the lust for connexion moved in the members of union, that they also perceived that they were naked, and were ashamed at the sight of each other, for until food had gone into them lust was not stirred up, and until lust had been stirred up shame and fear did not rule over them.

What does 'walking' mean in reference to God, who is everywhere? In my opinion God may be said to walk wherever throughout Scripture the presence of God is implied, when we hear that He sees all things and ' the eyes of the Lord are upon the just.' [ Ps 33:16 ] We read, too, that Jesus knew their thoughts and we read: ' Why do you harbor evil thoughts in your hearts?' [ Luke 6:8: Matt 9:4 ] When we reflect, therefore, on these statements, we have a knowledge of God in the act of walking. The sinner, in fact, had tried to hide away from the sight of God. He wished to conceal himself in his thoughts and was unwilling that his works appear in the light of day.' [ Matt 5:16 ] The just man saw Him face to face, [ Deut 34:10; 1 Cor 13:12 ] because the mind of the just man is in the presence of God and even converses with Him, as it is written: ' Judge for the fatherless and defend the widow said the Lord.' [ Isa 1:17,18 ] When a sinner, therefore, reads these passages from Scripture, he hears the voice of God walking towards evening, so to speak. What does the phrase 'towards evening' mean? Does it not mean that the sinner realizes his sin too late and that the shame which should have forestalled the fault before it occurred was itself too late? While the sinner is physically overcome by passions that affect the soul, he in his errant fashion does not heed, that is to say, does not hear, God, as He in holy Scripture walks in the hearts and minds of each and every one of us. God says: ' For I will dwell in their midst and I will walk among them and will be their God.' [ Lev. 26:12 ] Therefore, the dread of divine power returns to the soul when we are eager to hide ourselves. Then, placed as we are by the thought of our sins in the midst of the trees of Paradise where we committed sin, we are discovered to be desirous of concealing ourselves and to be thinking of hidden things which God does not demand of us. But He who is ' the discerner of our thoughts and intentions of our hearts, extending to the division of soul and spirit,' [ Heb 4:12 ] says: ' Adam, where are you?' [ Gen 3:9 ] How does God speak? Is it with the voice of the body? Not at all. He utters oracular words with a voice that is far more significant than is the voice of the body. The prophets heard this voice. It is heard by the faithful, but the wicked do not comprehend it. Wherefore we find the Evangelist in the Gospel listening to the voice of the Father speaking: ' I have glorified it and will glorify it again.' But the Jews did not listen. Hence they said: ' I had thundered.' [ John 12:28.29 ] We have given an instance above wherein God was thought to be walking when He was not. Here is an occasion when He was heard speaking, whereas to some people He spoke not. But let us take note of what He speaks: 'Adam, where, are you?' Even now these words have the healing power of salvation for those who hear the Word of God. Hence it is that the Jews who closed their eyes lest they hear do not deserve to hear even today. It follows that those who conceal themselves have a remedy, for he who hides himself is ashamed and he who is ashamed is converted, as it is written: ' Let them be much troubled and let them all be turned back speedily.' [ Ps 6:11 ] The very fact of His calling a person is a testimony of salvation to him who comes, because the Lord calls those for whom He feels pity. When He says, therefore, 'where are you?' it is not a question of a locality to one who knows what is hidden. God did not have His eyes closed, so that a man in hiding was able to escape His notice. For that reason He said: ' Adam has become like one of us,' [ Gen 3:22 ] because his eyes were opened. He, in fact, opened his eyes, so that he saw his own sin which he was unable to avoid. It happens that after we have sinned, we become, somehow or other, more aware of our crimes. We are then aware of the sin which we did not consider to be such before we actually fell into sin. Certainly we did not then believe that a sin was subject to our disapproval, for, if we had felt guilty, we would not have committed it. God sees the faults of all men and knows their offenses. His eyes penetrate into the secrets of the souls of each and every one of us. What, then, does He mean by 'Adam, where are you?' Does He not mean 'in what circumstances' are you; not, 'in what place'? It is, therefore, not a question, but a reproof. From what condition of goodness, beatitude, and grace, He means to say, have you fallen into this state of misery? You have forsaken eternal life. You have entombed yourself in the ways of sin and death. Where is that noble confidence and trust of yours? That fear that you show is evidence of your wrongdoing and that hiding place of yours betrays your dereliction. 'Where are you?' does not mean 'in what place,' but 'in what condition.' Where have your sins led you, so that you fled the God whom before you sought after? Perhaps you are disturbed by the fact that Adam is the first to be rebuked, although the woman was the first to eat the fruit. But the weaker sex begins by an act of disobedience, whereas the stronger sex is more liable to feelings of shame and forgiveness. The female furnished the occasion for wrongdoing; the male, the opportunity to feel ashamed.

Toward evening God was walking in paradise, that is, he was coming to judge them. He was still walking in paradise before their punishment, that is, the presence of God still moved among them, when they no longer stood firm in his command. It is fitting that he comes toward evening, that is, when the sun was already setting for them, that is, when the interior light of the truth was being taken from them. They heard his voice and hid from his sight. Who hides from the sight of God but he who has abandoned him and is now beginning to love what is his own? For they now were clothed with a lie, and he who speaks a lie speaks from what is his own. This is why they are said to hide near to the tree that was in the middle of paradise, that is, near themselves who were set in the middle rank of things beneath God and above bodies. Hence they became hidden to themselves so that they might be troubled by their wretched errors after they had left the light of truth that they were not. For the human soul can be a partaker in the truth, but the truth is the immutable God above it. Hence whoever turns away from that truth and toward himself, rejoicing not in God who rules and enlightens him but rather in his own seemingly free movements, becomes dark by reason of the lie. .

And when he heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, Adam and his wife hid themselves. After noon, those who had failed from the light of truth were accustomed to be visited. Hence, the Lord fittingly ascended the cross at noon, and having promised the thief the abode of paradise, after noon, that is, at the ninth hour, he gave up his spirit; so that indeed at the same hour at which the first man had touched the tree of transgression, the second man ascended the tree of redemption, and at the hour of the day at which he had expelled the transgressors from paradise, he might at that hour bring a confessor into paradise.

Adam and his wife hid themselves, he says, from the face of the Lord God in the midst of the trees of the garden. "When God inwardly turns away his face, let us not wonder that these things happen which are similar to madness, through excessive shame and fear, with that secret impulse also not being at rest, so that they did things unknowingly which signify something, for the sake of those who would know in the future for whom these things were written. For they who sin hide themselves from the face of God, because they render themselves unworthy of being seen by divine mercy. They hide themselves from the face of God, not so that the inward judge does not see their conscience, but so that they may never see the glory of his face except by repenting."

It was not only by the patience he exhibited that God wished to help them; he also wished to benefit them by the sound of his feet. God endowed his silent footsteps with sound so that Adam and Eve might be prepared, at that sound, to make supplication before him who made the sound. .

Rather they discerned the approach of the Lord by a certain breeze. As soon, therefore, as they had sinned, God appeared to them, producing consciousness of their sin, and calling them to repentance.

We read in Genesis that when Adam transgressed, when he paid heed to the serpent rather than to God, when he hid himself from the face of God, then God came into the garden and was walking about in the cool of day. Now listen to what the Scripture says. God sought out Adam, not at midday but in the evening. Adam had already lost the sunlight, for his high noon was over.

(Verse 8) And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise at evening. In many Latin manuscripts, instead of 'at evening,' it has 'in the afternoon' because we cannot translate the Greek word 'δειλινὸν' word for word. In Hebrew it is written 'Larue Aiom,' which Aquila interpreted as 'in the wind of the day,' that is, in the wind of the day. But Symmachus interpreted it as 'through the spirit of the day.' Moreover, Theodotion clearly showed in the spirit the cooling of the day, so that after the heat of noon had passed, he displayed the refreshing breath of the breeze.

See the Lord's loving kindness and the surpassing degree of his longsuffering. I mean, though being in a position to begrudge such great sinners the right of reply and rather than to consign them at once to the punishment he had determined in anticipation of their transgression, he shows patience and withholds action. He asks a question, receives a reply and questions them further as if inviting them to excuse themselves so that he might seize the opportunity to display his characteristic love in regard to the sinners, even despite their fall.

What are you saying—God strolls? Are we assigning feet to him? Have we no exalted conception of him? No, God doesn't stroll—perish the thought. How could he, present as he is everywhere and filling everything with his presence? Can he for whom heaven is throne and earth a footstool be confined to the garden? What rightminded person could say this? So what is the meaning of this statement, "They heard the sound of the Lord God as he strolled in the garden in the evening?" He wanted to provide them with such an experience as would induce in them a state of anguish, which in fact happened: they had so striking an experience that they tried to hide from the presence of God.

WE HAVE SAID ENOUGH, I would think, as far as our abilities lie, in giving our explanation lately of the tree, to teach you, dearly beloved, what was the reason why Sacred Scripture called it the knowledge of good and evil. So today I want to proceed to what follows, so that you may learn God's unspeakable love and the degree of considerateness he employs in his care for our race. Everything, you see, he made and arranged so that this rational being created by him had the good fortune to be of the greatest importance, and far from being in any way inferior to the life of the angels, enjoyed in the body their immunity from suffering. When, however, he saw them both through negligence transgress the commands he had given them, despite the warnings he had conveyed by threatening them and putting them more on the alert, he did not stop loving them at that point. Instead, faithful to his own goodness, he is like a loving father who sees his own son through negligence committing things unworthy of his upbringing and being reduced from his eminent position to the utmost depravity: he is stirred to the depths of his being as a father, yet, far from ceasing to care for him, he displays further concern for him in his desire to extricate him gradually from his abasement and return him to his previous position of dignity. Well, in just the same way does the good God, too, have pity on man for the plot to which he fell victim with his wife after being deceived and accepting the devil's advice through the serpent. Like a doctor treating a sick and suffering patient confined to bed, who needs much healing and the doctor's attention, he goes immediately to his side. In order, however, that you may learn God's ineffable considerateness, from the words themselves you must listen to the reading. "They heard the sound of the Lord God," the text says, "as he strolled in the garden in the evening; both Adam and his wife hid from the Lord's presence amongst the trees of the garden." [ Gen 3:8 ] Let us not, dearly beloved, pass heedlessly by the words from Sacred Scripture, nor re main at the level of their expression, but consider that the ordinariness of their expression occurs with our limitations in mind and that everything is done in a manner befitting God for the sake of our salvation. I mean, tell me this: were we prepared to follow the drift of the words without taking what is said in a sense befitting God, how could many absurdities be avoided? See now, let us consider this from the very beginning of the reading: "They heard the sound of the Lord God," the text says, "as he strolled in the garden in the evening, and they hid." What are you saying God strolls? Are we assigning feet to him? Have we no exalted conception of him? No, God doesn't stroll perish the thought: how could he, present as he is everywhere and filling everything with his presence? Can he, for whom heaven is his throne and earth his footstool, be confined to the garden? What right-minded person could say this? So what is the meaning of this statement, "They heard the sound of the Lord God as he strolled in the garden in the evening "? He wanted to provide them with such an experience as would induce in them a state of anguish, which in fact happened: they had so striking an experience that they tried to hide from the presence of God. Sin, you see, appeared and transgression, and they were covered in confusion. After all, that incorruptible judge conscience, I mean in taking a stand against the accused cried out in unmistakable tones, leveled its accusation, brought forward evidence, and as if before their very eyes wrote down details of their sins in all their magnitude. For this reason, you see, the loving Lord from on high, in forming human beings right from the be ginning, implanted conscience in them as a tireless accuser, proof against dissuasion and deception at ally time. Even if someone were able to escape the notice of all human beings in committing sin and perpetrating improper conduct, he could not escape that accuser; he would go his wicked way with this accuser ever present within him to trouble him, tear at him and flay him, never resting, be it in public, in company, at table, sleeping or rising, demanding justice for felonies committed, bringing into focus the impropriety of sin and the punishment due to it. Like a skillful physician it does not cease from applying its remedies; and should it find itself rebuffed, it does not take no for an answer but continues its ministrations unremittingly. This, after all, is its role, to make memory proof against dissuasion and not permit us to lay our sins to rest but keep them in focus so that even by this means it may make us reluctant to fall into the same ones again. You see, if we find an ally in conscience and get assistance from it as the forthright accuser innate within us, our scourge, tearing at our vitals, bringing more weight to bear on us than a public executioner, and yet in many cases we still fall victims to our indifference, to what extremes would we not be taken if we were deprived of such assistance? This, then, is the reason why in the present case the firstformed human being immediately hides on receiving this impression and realizing the presence of the Lord. Why so, tell me? Because he saw that stern accuser conscience, I mean taking his position against him. He had no one else as prosecutor and witness of his felonies with the sole exception of the one that he carried around within him. They were, however, taught through their nakedness the magnitude of the sins they had committed by the removal of the glory that had previously draped them like a garment, as well as by the accusation of conscience. So since they were covered in confusion after that grievous sin, they tried to hide. "they heard the sound of the lord God," the text says, "as he strolled in the garden in the evening; both Adam and his wife hid from the Lord's presence in the middle of the garden." Nothing is worse than sin, dearly beloved: once it appears it not merely fills us with shame but also robs of their senses people previously sensible and full of great intelligence. I mean, consider, I ask you, the depth of folly now displayed by this person previously endowed with intelligence, who had demonstrated the intelligence granted him in the actions he performed, and who had given vent to such inspired utterances. "Hearing the sound of the Lord God," the text says, "as he strolled in the garden in the evening, he and his wife hid from the Lord's presence amongst the trees of the garden." What depths of folly does this not reveal for this man to endeavor to hide from the God who is present every where, the Creator who brings all things from nonbeing into being, who knows things that lie hidden, who alone fashions people's hearts and understands all their works, [ Ps 33:15 ] who tests hearts and minds, [ Ps 7:9 ] who understands the movements of our heart? [ Ps 43:22 ] But do not wonder, dearly beloved. For that is the nature of sinners. Even if they are not able to hide, they try earnestly to hide. That you may know that they did this because they had been denuded of their glory, unable to endure the shame which enveloped them after their sin, consider where they hid themselves: In the midst of paradise. Just like heedless slaves and ones due for a whipping, when they are unable to hide from their master, try to run hither and thither into the corners of the house when their minds are shaking with fear, likewise these two ran around in that abode, that is in Paradise, but without finding any escape. It is not without purpose, however, that the time is specified: "They heard the sound of the Lord God," the text says, remember, "as he strolled in the garden in the evening." The purpose was for you to learn the Lord's loving kindness, that he didn't postpone action in the slightest; instead, once he saw what had happened and sized up the gravity of the ulcer, he at once set in motion the healing process lest the ulcer spread and open up an incurable wound. So he moved to catch it at an early stage and at once took action against the spread of the ulcer, not for a moment leaving the victim deprived of his prompt attention, out of fidelity to his own goodness. What I mean is that the enemy of our salvation had displayed such rage in his unfailing envy of our advantages that he concocted his plot from the very beginning and, through his disastrous advice, he robbed those two of their wonderful way of life. But God, ever anxious to try something new, watching over our affairs in his wisdom, saw, on the one hand, the malice practiced by the devil and, on the other hand, the man's negligence, which was the means of covering him in such shame once he had been prevailed on by his wife; so God takes his position as a gentle and loving judge presiding over a tribunal that causes fear and trembling, and conducts his examination in detail teaching us through this approach not to condemn our fellows before we have conducted a detailed examination. loving kindness and human beings' severity towards their fellows

What then does he mean by "Adam, where art thou?" Does he not mean "in what circumstance" are you; not, "in what place?" It is therefore not a question but a reproof. From what condition of goodness, beatitude and grace, he means to say, have you fallen into this state of misery? You have forsaken eternal life. You have entombed yourself in the ways of sin and death.

Insofar as a rebellion of the flesh against the rebellious soul prompted our parents to cover their shame, they experienced one kind of death—God's desertion of the soul. It was this death that was intimated when God asked Adam, who was beside himself with fear and in hiding, "Where are you?" This was not asked, of course, because God did not know the answer. Rather, it was asked in order to scold Adam by reminding him that there really was nowhere that he could be, once God was not in him.

And the Lord God called Adam and said to him: Where are you? Certainly, he did not ask out of ignorance but admonished by rebuking, so that he might consider where he was wherein God was not. For now that he had eaten from the forbidden tree, he was dead in the death of the soul, when it is said that his life had deserted her. "And this indeed pertains to a certain meaning, that just as the command was given to the man through whom it would reach the woman; so the man is first questioned. For the command from the Lord comes through the man to the woman: but the sin from the devil comes through the woman to the man. These things are full of mystical meanings, not by those in whom they were done, but by the most powerful wisdom of God doing this through them; however, let us not now express the meanings, but defend the deeds."

"Where are you, Adam?" Are you trapped in the imagined godlikeness that the serpent falsely promised you? Or are you prepared for the death that I, the Lord, decreed for you? Would that you had considered the fruits! Suppose, Adam, that instead of a serpent who might be the most despicable creature of all, an angel or a god had come to you? Would you have despised the commandment of him who gave you all these things, heeding instead the counsel of one who had not yet done you any good? Would you then have considered evil the very One who formed you out of nothing? Would you despise the One who made you a second god over creation? Would you dare instead to consider good the very fallen one who gave you only a verbal promise of some good? If another god were to come to you in power, should you not have rejected his advice? How much more then in the case of a serpent who came to you with no power, with no wondrous deeds but with only the empty word that it spoke to you? Commentary on Genesis-.

From the very enquiry it behooves us to marvel at God's surpassing love, not so much that he called him, but that he personally called him something human beings would never stoop to in the case of their fellows who share the same nature with themselves. I mean, you know that when they take their seat on the lofty tribunal and do justice to those guilty of felonies, they don't consider the accused worthy of having a reply made in their own person; consequently, they let them see how much disrepute they have incurred through committing these crimes. While the judge makes his response somebody else stands up and relays the words of the judge to the accused, and in turn reports his words to the judge. Such you would see to be the practice of judges the world over. With God, however, this is not the case. Instead? He calls personally: "The Lord God called Adam," the text says, "and said to him, 'Adam, where are you?'" See how much force lies concealed in this brief expression. You see, the very act of calling is a mark of great love beyond all telling, as it is a mark of great goodness to give an opportunity of reply to the accused in his shame, who dares not open his mouth or loosen his tongue. Yet, along with this loving kindness, the question, "'Where are you?'" is also very telling. In other words, it is as if he hinted to him in these words, What has happened? I left you in one condition, whereas now I find you in another; I left you clad in glory, whereas now I find you in nakedness. "'Where are you?'" How did this happen to you? Who has brought you to this changed condition? What kind of robber and brigand has robbed you like this in an instant of all the substance of your wealth and cast you into such indigence? Whence has come the nakedness you are experiencing? Who is responsible for depriving you of that wonderful garment you had the good fortune to wear? What is this sudden transformation What tempest has all at once in this way sunk all your precious cargo? What has happened to make you try to hide yourself from the one who has been so kind to you and placed you in a position of such importance? Who is it you are now endeavoring to avoid through fear? Surely, after all, no one has cause to accuse you? Surely, after all, no witnesses are testifying against you? Whence comes the fear and dread that overwhelms you?

God calls out to Adam, Genesis 3:9, 11 Where are you? as if ignorant where he was; and when he alleged that the shame of his nakedness was the cause (of his hiding himself), He inquired whether he had eaten of the tree, as if He were in doubt. By no means; God was neither uncertain about the commission of the sin, nor ignorant of Adam's whereabouts. It was certainly proper to summon the offender, who was concealing himself from the consciousness of his sin, and to bring him forth into the presence of his Lord, not merely by the calling out of his name, but with a home-thrust blow at the sin which he had at that moment committed. For the question ought not to be read in a merely interrogative tone, Where are you, Adam? but with an impressive and earnest voice, and with an air of imputation, Oh, Adam, where are you?—as much as to intimate: you are no longer here, you are in perdition—so that the voice is the utterance of One who is at once rebuking and sorrowing. God put the question with an appearance of uncertainty, in order that even here He might prove man to be the subject of a free will in the alternative of either a denial or a confession, and give to him the opportunity of freely acknowledging his transgression, and, so far, of lightening it. In like manner He inquires of Cain where his brother was, just as if He had not yet heard the blood of Abel crying from the ground, in order that he too might have the opportunity from the same power of the will of spontaneously denying, and to this degree aggravating, his crime; and that thus there might be supplied to us examples of confessing sins rather than of denying them: so that even then was initiated the evangelic doctrine, "By your words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned." Matthew 12:37 Now, although Adam was by reason of his condition under law subject to death, yet was hope preserved to him by the Lord's saying, "Behold, Adam is become as one of us;" that is, in consequence of the future taking of the man into the divine nature. Then what follows? "And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, (and eat), and live for ever." Inserting thus the particle of present time, "And now," He shows that He had made for a time, and at present, a prolongation of man's life. Therefore He did not actually curse Adam and Eve, for they were candidates for restoration, and they had been relieved by confession. [Against Marcion 2.25]

When Adam heard God's voice, he answered that he hid because he was naked. His answer was a wretched error, as if a man naked, as God had made him, could be displeasing to him. It is a distinguishing mark of error that whatever anyone finds personally displeasing he imagines is displeasing to God as well. We should understand in a lofty sense the words of the Lord, "Who told you that you were naked, unless because you have eaten from that tree about which I told you that from it alone you should not eat?" Before he was naked of any dissimulation and clothed with the divine light. From this light he turned away and turned toward himself. This is the meaning of his having eaten from that tree. He saw his nakedness, and it was displeasing to himself because he did not have anything of his own.

He said: I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked, and I hid myself. It is quite probable that God used to appear to those first humans in a human form suitable for such an action through his creation, which he never allowed them to notice their nakedness, lifting their intention to heavenly things, except after the sin when they felt the shameful movement in their members under the penal law of their limbs. Thus, they were affected as humans are accustomed to be under the eyes of others: and such an affection was from the penalty of sin, wanting to hide from him who nothing can hide from. For indeed, what now made them ashamed towards themselves, from which they made coverings for themselves, they feared much more vehemently to be seen by him even so covered, who brought, as it were, human eyes by a familiar temperament through the visible creation to see them.

"And they heard the sound [or voice] of the Lord as He walked in Paradise at the turn of the day; and they hid themselves from the Lord's presence among the trees in Paradise." [ Gen. 3:8 ] It was not just by the patience that He showed toward them that He wanted to help them, but He also wanted the sound of His footsteps to assist them; for He caused His silent footsteps to make a noise so that, at the noise, they might prepare to make supplication before Him who issued the sound. When, however, they failed to appear before Him with supplication, either as a result of His delay or because of the sound that had been sent forth in advance of Him, God then went on to employ the sound of His lips, just as He had used the sound of His footsteps, saying "Where are you, Adam?" [ Gen. 3:9 ] But instead of confessing his wrong and asking mercy before sentence was pronounced over him, Adam said, "I heard the sound of You in Paradise and I was afraid, for I saw that I was naked and so I hid myself." [ Gen. 3:10 ]

The sound of feet which went before the God who was about to be revealed to Adam and Eve in punishment prefigured the voice of John who was to come before the Son, holding a winnowing fan in his hands as he cleans his threshing floors, about to burn the chaff in fire and clean the wheat in order to bring it into his storehouses. [ [Matt. 3:12] ] their temptation at the be

"I heard the sound of You and I hid myself." [ Gen. 3:10 ] When had you heard the sound of Him as you do now? For you did not hear His sound when He fashioned you and brought you into Paradise, nor when He cast a stillness upon you and extracted your rib, constructing and bringing to you a wife. If it is only just recently that you have heard the sound of Him, you should realize even now that this sound of footsteps was made in order that your lips might make supplication. Speak to Him before He questions you about the coming of the serpent and about your and Eve's transgression, in case the confession of your lips might absolve you of the sin of eating the fruit which your fingers plucked. But they failed to confess anything about what they had done; instead, they told the Omniscient what had happened to them. footsteps

"Where are you, Adam? In the state of divinity which the serpent promised you? Or subject to death which I pronounced over you, should you look to the fruits? Now suppose, Adam, that instead of the utterly despicable serpent there had come to you an angel, or another divine being, would it have been right for you to despise the command of Him who gave you all these things and instead to listen to the counsel of one who had not yet in actual fact performed anything good for you? Would you consider as evil Him who fashioned you out of nothing and made you a second god over creation, instead holding to be good one who had merely with words promised you some advantage? And if it would not be right for you to be deceived by the counsel of some other god, were he to come to you with a show of force, how much more so when it is a serpent that has come to you, without any mighty acts or miracles, but with only the bare words which it addressed to you? You have held your God to be false and your deceiver to be true; you have broken faith with your Benefactor who put you in authority over everything, and you have believed that deceiver who has cunningly managed to take away your authority completely."

Had the serpent been prevented from coming to tempt Adam, the people who today complain about its having come would be complaining about its having been prevented from coming; for they would be saying that the serpent-- who in fact came so that Adam might acquire eternal life by means of a short-lived temptation--had been prevented from doing so out of envy. And those who now say that Adam would never have gone astray if the serpent had not come would instead be saying that had the serpent come, Adam would not have gone astray. For, just as they imagine that they are doing well by saying, "Had the serpent not come, Adam and Eve would not have gone astray," all the more so would they imagine that they did well by saying, "Had the serpent come, it would not have led Adam and Eve astray." Indeed, who would ever have believed it, had it not actually happened, that Adam should have listened to a serpent or Eve been won over by a reptile!

"I heard the sound of You, and I was afraid and hid myself. " [ Gen. 3:10 ] Because Adam omitted what was requisite and instead said something that was not required--for instead of confessing what he had done, which would have benefited him, he related what had happened to him, which did not benefit him--God said to him, "Who showed you that you are naked? You have eaten of the Tree from which I commanded you not to eat. [ Gen. 3:11 ] You have seen your own nakedness with the help of the vision which the Tree bestowed upon you--the same that had promised you a glorious vision of divinity."

Whence comes the knowledge of your nakedness? Tell me: what is new and surprising? Who could ever have told you of this, unless you have become the guilty cause of your own shame, unless you have eaten from that one tree I told you not to eat from? See the Lord's loving kindness and the surpassing degree of his longsuffering. I mean, though being in a position to begrudge such a great sinner the right of reply and rather than to consign him at once to the punishment he had deter mined on in anticipation of his transgressing, he shows patience and withholds action: he asks a question, receives a reply, and questions him further as if inviting him to excuse himself so that he might seize the opportunity to display his characteristic love in regard to the sinner even despite his fall. He thus teaches us through this instance as well when we judge the guilty not to berate them harshly or display the savagery of wild beasts in their regard, but rather employ much longsuffering and mercy inasmuch as we are dispensing justice to our Own members, and out of a sense of kinship we should temper justice with love. After all, it is not with out purpose that Sacred Scripture employs such great considerateness; instead, through the concreteness of the expressions it both teaches us God's loving kindness and promotes our emotions so that we may imitate as far as human capacity allows the goodness of the Lord.

Do you see, dear friend, how patient God is? For when he said, "Adam, where are you?" and when Adam did not at once confess his sin but said, "I heard your voice, O Lord, and realized that I am naked and hid myself," God was not angered, nor did he immediately turn away. Rather, he gave him the opportunity of a second reply and said, "Who told you that you are naked? Unless you ate of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat." Consider how profound are the words of God's wisdom. He says, "Why do you say that you are naked but hide your sin? Do you really think that I see only your body but do not see your heart and your thoughts?" Since Adam was deceived he hoped that God would not know his sin. He said something like this to himself, "If I say that I am naked, God in his ignorance will say, 'Why are you naked?' Then I shall have to deny and say, 'I do not know,' and so I shall not be caught by him and he will give me back the garment that I had at first. If not, as long as he does not cast me out, he will not exile me!" While he was thinking these thoughts … God, unwilling to multiply his guilt, says, "How did you realize that you are naked? Unless you ate of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat." It is as though he said, "Do you really think that you can hide from me? Do you imagine that I do not know what you have done? Will you not say, 'I have sinned?' Say, O scoundrel, 'Yes, it is true, Master, I have transgressed your command. I have fallen by listening to the woman's counsel, I am greatly at fault for doing what she said and disobeying your word. Have mercy on me!' " But he does not humble himself, he does not bend. The neck of his heart is like a sinew of iron! For had he said this he might have stayed in paradise. By this one word he might have spared himself that whole cycle of evils without number that he endured by his expulsion and in spending so many centuries in hell.

Therefore, the Lord willing now to punish sinners asked according to the manner of justice more than that penalty, from which they were already compelled to be ashamed, For he says, Who told you that you were naked, unless you have eaten from the tree from which I commanded you not to eat? For from here indeed death was conceived because of God's sentence, who had thus threatened, made the members be noticed with concupiscence: where their eyes are said to be opened, and followed what would cause shame.

Where could you have got the knowledge of this, he says, and be covered in such confusion, unless you have been so intemperate as to despise my command? Notice, dearly beloved, the excess of God's goodness, how, in this manner of one friend communing with another and remonstrating with him over transgression of his instructions, he enters into dialog with Adam. "'Who told you that you are naked unless you have eaten from that one tree I told you not to eat from?'" Even the phrase, "that one tree," bears a slight nuance: Surely I didn't inhibit your enjoyment? it is saying. Did I not relieve you of every need, give you authority over everything in the garden, and only instruct you to keep away from that one thing so that you might be in a position to know that you are subject to direction and required to show some obedience? So what kind of terrible in difference is this that, despite your having such great enjoyment, you could not bear to keep away from that one thing but rather hastened in that manner to violate the command given you by me and envelop yourself in so many excesses? What good was that to you? Hadn't I warned you of that in advance? Wasn't it my intention to check you be forehand with fear of punishment and so make you more cautious? Didn't I tell you what would be likely to happen? Didn't I for that reason forbid your eating that fruit so that you wouldn't fall victim to those faults? Who could consider you deserving of excuse now that you've proved to be so unresponsive despite so many directions? (138d) didn't I thus instruct you in every detail, like a father to his own dear son, and teach you to keep away from this tree while being free to taste all the others lest it wreak havoc with all your endowments? Perhaps, however, you have thought advice from an other quarter acceptable and to be preferred to my command, and followed it in the expectation of gaining greater advantages, and out of scorn for my command you were bold enough to eat from the tree. See what you suffered through that experiment: you discovered the disastrous effect of that advice. Do you see the loving kindness of the judge? Do you see his mildness and longsuffering? Do you see his considerateness stretching beyond all thought and imagination? Do you see how through his question and the words, "Who told you that you are naked unless you have eaten from that one tree I told you not to eat from?" he wanted to open to you the doors to excuse so that even in regard to such a sinful person he might show his characteristic love? So let us listen to the accused as well, and hear what he has to say in reply to this question. "Adam said," the text goes on, "The woman you gave me as my companion gave me fruit from the tree and I ate it." [ Gen 3:12 ] Pitiable words and full of much pity, and capable of moving the Lord to clemency, He who is so gentle, overcoming our sins by his goodness. For when he had shaken his disposition by a great display of tolerance and had shown him the magnitude of his sin, Adam all but preparing his own defense, said to Him, "the woman you gave me as my companion." In other words, how could I have ever expected that I would have been so covered in confusion through the one you created with the very purpose of bringing me consolation from her person? You gave her to me, you led her to meet me. She I know not under what impulse in her turn gave me fruit from the tree and I ate it. While this explanation seems to offer some excuse, it is in fact devoid of all defense. I mean, what defense can you lay claim to, he says, for forgetting my commands and judging the bauble given by your wife more important than words spoken by me? After all, even if your wife did give it to you, still my command and the fear of punishment were sufficient to dispose you to avoid tasting. I mean, surely you were not ignorant? Surely you weren't unaware? With this in mind, out of care for you, I spoke up with the aim of preventing your falling victim to these faults; and so, even if your wife prepared the way for your transgressing my command, nevertheless you were not without guilt: you should have regarded my command as more worthy of trust, and, beyond dissuading yourself alone from eating, you should have demonstrated the gravity of the sin to your wife as well. After all, you are head of your wife, [ I Cor 11:3 ] and she has been created for your sake; but you have inverted the proper order: not only have you failed to keep her on the straight and narrow but you have been dragged down with her, and whereas the rest of the body should follow the head, the contrary has in fact occurred, the head following the rest of the body, turning things upside down. Hence, since you have reversed the proper order completely, you now find yourself in that desperate situation after being clad previously in such wonderful splendor. So who could adequately lament the loss you have sustained of such great benefits? But, all the same, even if all these things have befallen you, put the blame on no one else but yourself and your own neglect; after all, if you had not been willing, your wife would have been unable to bring you to this disastrous state. I mean, surely she didn't urge you? Surely she didn't inveigle you? Surely she didn't deceive you? She merely gave you the fruit, and in an instant with such ease you were prevailed upon to taste it, without a thought to my command; instead, you thought you had been taken in by me and had not been permitted this food for this reason, lest you happen upon greater blessings. What grounds would you have for thinking you were deceived by me, the donor of such acts of kindness to you? What great kindness did this indicate, to take early precautions and clearly outline what you must abstain from so as not to fall into the excesses in which you have now immersed yourself? All these warnings, however, you gave no heed to, and so, behold, you have found out for yourself by experience the seriousness of these sins; so at this point don't lay the blame on your wife alone, but on your own indifference as well

You see, since he was not unaware of the truth when he asked them but rather knew, and knew very well, he shows consideration for their limitations so as to demonstrate his own loving kindness, and he invites them to make admission of their faults.

Insofar as he as yet had no experience of the divine severity, Adam could be deceived in believing that his transgression was merely venial. And therefore he was at least not deceived in the same way that Eve was. He was merely mistaken concerning the judgment that would follow his attempt to excuse himself: "The woman you placed at my side gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate." To summarize briefly: though not equally deceived by believing the serpent, they equally sinned and were caught and ensnared by the devil.

Then, as is quite common in cases of pride, he does not accuse himself of having consented to the woman but pushes the fault off upon the woman. Thus, as if out of a cleverness the poor fellow had conceived, he cunningly tried to attribute his sinning to God himself. For he did not just say, "the woman gave to me," but added on, "the woman you gave to me." Nothing is as characteristic of sinners as to want to attribute to God everything for which they are accused. This arises from that vein of pride. For man sinned in wishing to be like God, that is, to be free from his dominion, as God is free from all dominion, since he is the Lord of all.

And Adam said: The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate. "Was it pride that he did not say, I have sinned? It has the deformity of confusion, and it does not have the humility of confession. These things were written for this reason, because these very questions were certainly made for this reason, so that they might be usefully written, that we might notice how men labor with pride today, trying not to refer anything evil they have done except to the Creator, while they wish any good they have done to be attributed to themselves. The woman, he said, whom you gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate, as if she were given to this end, so that she rather should not obey the man, and both should obey God."

Once again Adam failed to confess his fault, laying the blame on the woman who was like him: "The woman with whom you provided me gave me of the Tree and I ate. [ Gen. 3:12 ] I myself did not approach the Tree, nor was it my hand which presumed to stretch out for the fruit." This is why the Apostle too says, "Adam himself did not sin, but Eve transgressed the commandment." [ I Tim. 2:14 ] But if He gave you a wife, Adam, He gave her as a helper and not as a harmer, as someone who receives instructions, rather than as one who gives orders.

Instead of confessing what he had done, which would have helped him, he related what had been done to him, which did not help him at all.… Adam again failed to confess his folly and blamed the woman.

If Adam and Eve had sought to repent after they had transgressed the commandment, even though they would not have regained that which they had possessed before their transgression of the commandment, they would have escaped from the curses that were decreed on the earth and upon them.

That fault is pardonable which is followed by an admission of guilt. The woman, therefore, is not to be despaired of, who did not keep silent before God, but who preferred to admit her sin-the woman on whom was passed a sentence that was salutary. It is good to suffer condemnation for our sins and to be scourged for our crimes, provided we are scourged along with other men. Hence, Cain, because he wanted to deny his guilt, was judged unworthy to be punished in his sin. He was forgiven without prescribed penalty, not, perhaps, for having committed such a serious crime as parricide-he was responsible for his brother's death-as one of sacrilege, in that he thought he had deceived God when he said: ' I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?' [ Gen 4:9 ] And so the accusation is reserved for his accuser, the Devil, prescribing that he be scourged along with his angels, since he did not wish to be scourged with men. Of such, therefore, has it been said: ' There is no regard for their death and they shall not be scourged like other men.' [ Ps 72:4,5 ] The woman's case is, accordingly, of a different character. Although she incurred the sin of disobedience, she still possessed in the tree of Paradise food for virtue. And so she admitted her sin and was considered worthy of pardon. ' The just is first accuser of himself in the beginning of his speech.' [ Prov 18:17 ] No one can be justified from sin unless he has first made confession of his sin. Wherefore the Lord says: ' Tell if thou hast anything to justify thyself.' [ Isa 43:26 ] Because Eve has admitted her crime, she is given a milder and more salutary sentence, which condemned her wrongdoing and did not refuse pardon. [ Gen 3:16 ] She was to serve under her husband's power, first, that she might not be inclined to do wrong, and, secondly, that, being in a position subject to a stronger vessel, she might not dishonor her husband, but on the contrary, might be governed by his counsel. [ 1 Peter 3:7 ] I see clearly here the mystery of Christ and His Church. The Church's turning toward Christ in times to come and a religious servitude submissive to the Word of God-these are conditions far better than the liberty of this world. Hence it is written: ' Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and shall serve him only.' [ Deut 6:13; Luke 4:8 ] Servitude, therefore, of this sort is a gift of God. Wherefore, compliance with this servitude is to be reckoned among blessings. We have the example of Isaac granting it as a blessing to his son Esau that he should serve his brothers. Hence he asked for his father's blessing. Although he knew that one blessing had been taken from him, he asked for another: ' Have you only one blessing, father?' [ Gen 27:40,38 ] By this servitude, therefore, Esau, who had before he sold birthright to satisfy his appetite and who in his zeal for hunting in the field had not the benefits derived from a blessing, [ Gen 25:27 ] had now come to believe that he would fare better in the future if he would pay reverence to his brother as a type of Christ. By this kind of servitude Christian folk grow strong, as we have it expressed in the words of the Lord to His disciples: ' Whoever wishes to be first among you, let him be the slave of all of you.' [ Matt 20:27 ] Hence charity, which is greater than hope and faith, brings this servitude to pass, for it is written: ' By charity serve one another.' [ Gal 5:13 ] This, then, is the mystery mentioned by the Apostle in reference to Christ and the Church. [ Eph. 5:32 ] The servitude existed formerly, in fact, but in a condition of disobedience which was to be later made salutary by the generation of children ' in faith and love and holiness with modesty.' [ 1 Tim 2:15 ] What was certainly among the fathers a generation brought into existence in sin shall become salutary in the children, so that what was a stumbling block to the Jews shall in the society of Christians undergo improvement. ' The serpent urged me,' she said. This seemed to God to be pardonable, inasmuch as He knew that the serpent found numerous ways to deceive people. ' Satan disguises himself as an angel of light' and 'his ministers as ministers of justice,' [ 2 Cor 11:14,15 ] imposing false names on individual things, so as to call 'rashness' a virtue and avarice 'industry.' The serpent, in fact, deceived the woman and the woman led the man away from truth to a violation of duty. The serpent is a type of the pleasures of the body. The woman stands for our senses and the man, for our minds. Pleasure stirs the senses, which, in turn, have their effect on the mind. Pleasure, therefore, is the primary source of sin. For this reason, do not wonder at the fact that by God's judgment the serpent was first condemned, then the woman, and finally the man. The order of condemnation, too, corresponded to that of the crimes committed, for pleasure usually captivates the senses and the senses, the mind. To convince you that the serpent is the type of pleasure, take note of his condemnation.

And the Lord God said to the woman: Why have you done this? She answered: The serpent deceived me, and I ate. She also does not confess her sin, but refers it to another, of an unequal sex, with equal pride, saying: The serpent deceived me, and I ate; as if anyone's persuasion ought to have been preferred to God's command. And she also refers the cause of her fault to the Creator, who created the serpent in paradise through which she was deceived.

Again, after Adam had done wrong God gave him a chance to repent and be forgiven, and yet he kept on being stiff-necked and unrepentant. For God came to him and said, "Adam, where are you?" instead of saying, "From what glory are you come to this? Are you not ashamed? Why did you sin? Why did you go astray?"—as if urging him sharply to say, "Forgive me!" But there was no sign of humility. There was no change of heart but rather the contrary. He replied, "The wife that you gave me"—mark you, not "my wife"—"deceived me." "The wife that you gave me," as if to say, "this disaster you placed on my head." So it is, my brethren, when a man has not the guts to accuse himself, he does not scruple to accuse God himself. Then God came to Eve and said to her, "Why did you not keep the command I gave you?" as if saying, "If you would only say, 'Forgive me,' to humble your soul and be forgiven." And again, not a word! No "forgive me." She only answered, "The serpent deceived me!"—as if to say, if the serpent did wrong, what concern is that to me? What are you doing, you wretches? Kneel in repentance, acknowledge your fault, take pity on your nakedness. But neither the one nor the other stooped to self-accusation, no trace of humility was found in either of them.And now look and consider how this was only an anticipation of our own state! See how many and great the evils it has brought on us—this self-justification, this holding fast to our own will, this obstinacy in being our own guide.

When Adam was unwilling to confess his fault, God went down to Eve with a question, saying to her, "What is this that you have done?" [ Gen. 3:13 ] Eve, too, instead of making supplication with tears and taking the fault upon herself in the hope that pardon might come upon herself and her husband, answered back, not saying, "The serpent counseled me" or "enticed me," but simply, "The serpent deceived me and I ate. " [ Gen. 3:13 ]

Since Adam did not wish to confess his folly, God came down to question Eve and said to her, "What is this that you have done?" Eve too, instead of making supplication with her tears and bearing the fault herself so that mercy might take hold of both her and her husband, responded by saying not "The serpent counseled or seduced me" but "The serpent deceived me and I ate." When the two of them had been questioned and were both found to be wanting in remorse or true contrition, God went down to the serpent not to make inquiry but to render punishment. For where there is opportunity for repentance, it would be right to inquire, but to one who is a stranger to repentance, judgment is fitting.

Accordingly, when he had addressed himself at sufficient length to Adam, and the latter made excuses for his sins by transferring, as he thought, the guilt to his wife, behold the good Lord, how much considerateness he employs again and deems her also worthy of a response from him: "God said to the woman." the text goes on "What is this you have done?" [ Gen 3:13 ] You heard your husband, he says, transferring the responsibility to you and putting all the blame on you, given to him though you were as his template and created for the purpose of providing him with comfort from your person inasmuch as you have the same being as he and share in the same nature. So why did you do this, O woman? For what reason did you become the cause of such dreadful shame to your self and your husband? What advantage did you gain from such intemperance? What benefit came to you from the deception which you willingly embraced and made your husband sharer in? So what did the woman reply? "the serpent deceived me, and I ate." See her overcome by great fear and making excuses for her sins: just as her husband seemed to transfer the blame to his wife in the words, "My wife brought it and gave it to me and I ate it," so she too, finding no way out admits what happened and says, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." That evil creature, she says, brought that disaster upon us, his baleful advice led us to that shame, he deceived me and I ate. Don't pass these words by heedlessly, dearly beloved; instead, let us study them precisely and gain much benefit from them. I mean, a tribunal is a fearful thing, capable of arousing terror, and we must listen carefully to everything and lay up in our minds the great treasure to be gained from what is said. that is to say, notice the man also saying, "The woman you gave me as my companion gave it to me, and I ate it." No evidence of force, no evidence of pressure only choice and decision: simply "gave," not "forced" or "pressured." She in turn in making her excuse didn't say, The serpent forced me and I ate. Instead, what? "The serpent deceived me." She had the choice of being deceived or not being deceived. "The serpent deceived me," she said. In other words, the enemy of our salvation, working through that evil creature, brought forward his advice and deceived her not forcing or pressuring but through his deadly advice putting his deception into effect after finding the woman easily disposed to embrace the deception and thus deprived of any excuse.

When God had left Adam, he came to Eve. He wanted to show her that she too would be cast out, if she was unwilling to repent. So he said, "What is this that you have done?" so that she at least might be able to say, "I have sinned." Why else did God need to speak these words to her, unless indeed to enable her to say, "In my folly, O Master, I, a lowly wretch, have done this, and have disobeyed you. Have mercy on me!" But she did not say this. What did she say? "The serpent beguiled me." How senseless! So you have spoken with the serpent, who speaks against your Master? Him you have preferred to God who made you. You have valued his advice more highly and held it to be truer than the commandment of your Master! So, when Eve too was unable to say, "I have sinned," both were cast out from the place of enjoyment. They were banished from paradise and from God.

The serpent is a type of the pleasures of the body. The woman stands for our senses and the man for our minds. Pleasure stirs the senses, which in turn have their effect on the mind. Pleasure, therefore, is the primary source of sin. For this reason, do not wonder at the fact that by God's judgment the serpent was first condemned, then the woman and finally the man. The order of condemnation, too, corresponded to that of the crimes committed, for pleasure usually captivates the senses, and the senses captivate the mind. To convince you that the serpent is the type of pleasure, take note of his condemnation. "On your breast and on your belly shall you crawl," we read. Only those who live for the pleasures of the stomach can be said to walk on their bellies, "whose god is their belly and their glory is their shame," who eat of what is earthy and who, weighed down with food, are bent over toward what is of earth. The serpent is well called the symbol of pleasure in that, intent on food, he seems to feed on the earth: "On your breast and on your belly shall you crawl, dust shall you eat all the days of your life."

The serpent is not now questioned but received punishment first, because he cannot confess his sin. One who cannot confess sin has no ground at all for excusing himself. There is no mention now of that condemnation of the devil that is reserved for the last judgment, of which the Lord speaks when he says, "Depart into the eternal fire, which has been prepared for the devil and his angels." Rather it mentions that punishment of his against which we must be on guard. For his punishment is that he has in his power those who despise the command of God. The words by which sentence is pronounced against him make this clear. The punishment is the greater because he rejoices over this unhappy power, whereas before his fall he was accustomed to rejoice in the sublime truth, in which he did not remain. Hence even the cattle are set ahead of him, not in power but in the preservation of their nature. For cattle did not lose a heavenly happiness that they never had but live their life in the nature that they received. Hence God said to him, "You will creep upon your chest and belly." We can see this in the snake as well, and the expression is transferred from that visible animal to this invisible enemy of ours. For the term chest signifies "pride" because the strong drives of the soul rule there. The term belly signifies "carnal desire" because that part of the body is recognized as softer. Since by these means he creeps up on those whom he wants to deceive, God said, "You will creep upon your chest and belly."

And the Lord God said to the serpent: Because you have done this, you are cursed above all cattle and beasts of the earth. Because the serpent was not asked why he did this, it can be seen that he did not do it by his own nature and will, but the devil had worked through and from him, who was already destined for the fire because of his sin of impiety and pride. Therefore, what is said to the serpent is also without a doubt figurative and refers to him who worked through the serpent. For in these words, the tempter is described as he would be to the human race.

You shall go upon your breast, and you shall eat dust all the days of your life. For indeed, the serpent goes on its breast because all the steps of the devil are wickedness and deceit: for in its breast is indicated the craftiness and deceptions of its thoughts, with which it creeps to those it wishes to deceive, for which the old translation has: You shall creep on your breast and belly. He creeps with his breast when he suggests earthly thoughts to men, whom he desires to make his members. He also creeps with his belly when he excites them, overcome by gluttony, into the heat of lust. For all that creep drag their body over the earth. The body of the devil, moreover, are all the reprobates; and he creeps with his breast and belly when he lowers them by wicked thoughts or the allurements of gluttony and luxury. He devours the earth when he is nourished and delighted by the error of sinners, and by deceiving them, he snatches them into destruction. For just as the saints are often signified by the name of heaven, so by the name of the earth those who savor earthly things are indicated, as it is said to Adam in the following: You are earth, and to earth you shall go, which our translation has: For you are dust, and to dust you shall return. As a sign of this spiritual devouring, the irrational serpent itself, with which the devil used as his instrument to deceive man, is now commanded to eat material earth, to which it previously, along with other animals of the earth, was granted to eat the herbs and fruits of the trees.

God said to the devil: "Dust you shall eat." Is it the earth that we tread underfoot that the devil eats, brethren? No, it is people who are earthly minded, sensual and proud, who love the earth and place all their hopes in it. They labor entirely for carnal advantages, rather for such pleasures, and think little or nothing of the salvation of their souls. People like these, then, the devil seeks. He seems to do so justly, for they were assigned to him at the beginning of the world when it was said to him, "Dust you shall eat." Therefore let each one look to his own conscience. If he sees that he has greater care for his body than for his soul, let him fear that he will become the food of the serpent.

When the two of them had been questioned and found to be lacking in contrition or valid excuse, God descended to the serpent, not with a question, but with a punishment. For where there was a possibility of repentance He made use of questions, but with a creature that is alien to repentance He employed a sentence of judgment. And you should realize that the serpent cannot repent from the fact that, when God said to it, "Because you have done this you are more cursed than all cattle," [ Gen. 3:14 ] it did not say "I did not do it" because it was afraid to lie, nor did it say "I did it," because it was alien to repentance.

When [Adam and Eve] had been questioned and were both found to be wanting in remorse or true contrition, God went down to the serpent, not to make inquiry but to render punishment. For where there is opportunity for repentance, it would be right to inquire, but to one who is a stranger to repentance, judgment is fitting. It is so that you might know that the serpent is not capable of repentance, that when God said to it, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above every beast," the serpent did not say, "I did not do it," because it was afraid to lie, nor did it say, "I did it," because it was a stranger to repentance.

"Cursed are you above every beast," because you deceived those who rule over all the beasts. Instead of being more clever than all the beasts you will be more cursed than all the beasts and "on your belly shall you go," because you brought birth pangs upon the race of women. And "dust you shall eat all days of your life," because you deprived Adam and Eve from eating of the tree of life.

(Verse 14.) You shall tread upon your chest and your stomach. The Septuagint translators added the stomach, but in Hebrew it only has the chest, to reveal the cunning and cunning thoughts, that all his steps are wickedness and deceit. But also what follows: You shall eat dust. In Hebrew it is written 'Aphar,' which we can say is ashes and dust.

Notice, moreover, the good Lord is satisfied with their words and doesn't oblige them to say any more. You see, since he was not unaware of the truth when he asked them, but rather knew, and knew very well, he shows considerateness for their limitations so as to demonstrate his own loving kindness, and he invites them to make admission of their faults. Hence he asks them nothing further. After all, of course, it was necessary to unmask the kind of deception; but to show us that his questioning did not arise from ignorance, he is satisfied with their words. The woman, remember, in saying, "The serpent deceived me and I ate," hinted at that deadly advice which she had accepted from the devil, namely, You will be like gods after eating it. Did you notice how precisely Adam was questioned? With how much longsuffering the woman also was brought before the tribunal? How each of them made their excuse? Now, then, consider in this passage the surpassing degree of the Judge's ineffable love: when the woman said, "The serpent deceived me and I ate," he doesn't then grant the serpent a reply, nor give it opportunity for excuse, nor question it as he did the man and woman; instead, he accepts the excuses from them and turns on that creature as the guilty party in all the evils. Since, from his being God, and therefore knowing secret things, he was aware that the serpent was the means of achieving the devil's advice and his envy shown in regard to human beings, his purpose was for you to discover his goodness in the way he addressed himself in their case (despite his knowledge of the facts), to Adam, on the one hand, in the words, "Where are you? Who told you you are naked?" and, on the other hand, to the woman in the words, "Why did you do it?" whereas in the case of this evil creature he did nothing of the sort. What did he say to him? "The Lord God said to the serpent, 'Because you have done this.'" Do you see the difference? While he said to the woman, "Why have you done it? ", to the serpent he said, "Because you have done it." Because you have perpetrated this wickedness, he says, because you have adduced this deadly advice, because you have ministered to such envy, because you have whetted your hatred for this creature of mine, "Accursed are you beyond all the beasts and all the wild animals of the earth. Upon your belly shall you grovel and slide, and eat dirt all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed. He shall watch for your head, and you shall watch for his heel." [ Gen 3:14, Gen 3:15 ] Notice in this passage, I ask you, the order and sequence illustrating God's loving kindness. I mean, he began directing his enquiries to the man, and then turned his attention to the woman. When she mentioned who was the cause of her fall, he turned to the serpent: not deeming him worth a reply, he sentenced him to his punishment and extended it for all time; in the person of the serpent a lasting instruction was provided for everyone in future never again to accept that deadly advice nor be deceived by stratagems devised by him through the serpent to deliver his advice, why was such punishment inflicted on that reptile? This happened as an ex ample of God's loving kindness beyond all telling: just as a loving father punishes the man who killed his own son, and destroys the sword and dagger by which he committed the murder, smashing them into many pieces, in just the same way the good God, too, sentenced this creature to an eternal punishment, when like some sword, he served the purpose of the devil's villainy so that we might reason from this evident and visible punishment to the depths of dishonor in which the devil also found himself. After all, if this creature who played the part of an instrument suffered such frustration, what kind of punishment is it likely that the devil received? To be more accurate, however, we have already been instructed in this by Christ when he spoke through the holy Gospels to those standing at his left hand: "Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels." [ Matt 25:41 ] In other words, this fate has been prepared for him from ages past, and that unquenchable fire awaits him. So what could be more pitiful than the fate of those people who on account of neglect of their own salvation make themselves liable to that punishment prepared for that demon? You see, for proof that the kingdom has been prepared for us if we are willing to give evidence of virtue and follow the laws laid down by Christ, listen further to his words: "Come, blessed of my Father: inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." [ Matt 25:34 ] Do you see the unquenchable fire prepared for the demon, on the one hand, and for us, on the other hand, the kingdom, provided our resolve does not fail? Accordingly, let us keep these things in mind and give heed to our way of living, avoiding evil and never falling victim to the devil's wiles. On the contrary, with good will and no slackening of effort let us keep before our eyes the punishment inflicted on the serpent so that we may hasten to wards the goal of our judgment and see the greatness of God's loving kindness. To draw a comparison: it often happens that when people notice a judge exercising his duties and sentencing the accused, they stay there for the whole day and don't leave until they see the judge rise. Much more should we in this instance watch the good God with greater enthusiasm to see how he imposes that severe penalty on the serpent, on the one hand, for the purpose of providing us, by the means of this corporeal creature which that wicked demon had used like some instrument, with an impression of the punishment the demon was due to receive; and how, on the other hand, in his clemency he imposes a due penalty on the woman and the man or an admonition rather than a punishment with the purpose of our observing everything precisely and marvelling at the concern of the loving God shown in regard to our nature. So what does the text say? "The Lord God said to the serpent, 'Because you have done this, accursed are you beyond all the beasts and all the wild animals of the earth. Upon your belly shall you grovel and slide, and eat dirt all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed. He shall watch for your head, and you shall watch for his heel.'" His anger is pro found and intense, since profound also was the excess of the deception which the evil demon brought into play through that creature. "The Lord God said to the serpent, 'Because you have done this.'" Because you were the means of such villainy, he is saying, and put the deception into effect in this way by adducing the deadly advice and mixing the lethal potion; because you did this and intended to expel from my favor those creatures of mine, ministering to the purpose of that evil demon who had been cast down from heaven to earth for his envy and overweening arrogance hence, because he used you as his instrument in these exploits, I inflict unremitting punishment on you, so that from what has befallen you he, too, may be in a position to know the extent of the punishment awaiting him, and that human beings to come may be instructed never to fall victim to his counsels nor give rein to his deceit lest they incur the same penalties. On this account you are accursed beyond all the wild animals since you did not employ your cunning as you ought, instead, the superiority over all the other animals that you enjoyed proved to be the cause of all these evils for you. "The serpent," the text says, remember, "was the most cunning of all the beasts and wild animals of the earth." Hence you have become accursed beyond all the beasts and the wild animals of the earth. Since, however, the curse was not perceptible to the senses nor visible to the naked eye, he accordingly inflicts on him a visible punishment so that we may have continually be fore our eyes reminders of his punishment to contemplate. "Upon your belly shall you grovel and slide, and eat dirt all the days of your life," because you took advantage of your physical form improperly, he is saying, even presuming to enter into conversation with the being I had created as rational. So just as the devil who worked through you, employing you as his instrument, had been cast down from heaven for setting his ambitions above his station, well, in just the same way I direct that you too assume a different physical shape, slide upon the earth and have that diet, so that in future you won't be able to look upwards; instead, it will be your lot ever to be in this lowly position, and unlike all the other animals eat dirt. And not only this, but "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed." I'm not even content with this, that you slide on the earth: I will make the woman your implacable enemy, and not simply her, but her seed as well I will cause to be perpetually at odds with your seed. "He will watch for your head, and you will watch for his heel." That is to say, I will supply him with such force that he will constantly threaten your head, whereas you will be trodden under his feet. See, dearly beloved, by means of the punishment against this creature, the extent of the care he reveals to us that he has for the human race. So much is evident even in regard to the serpent perceptible to our senses; yet it is also possible to anyone interested to study the sequel to this in what is written, and to know that if this is the story of the serpent that is visible, much more should the words be under stood to refer also to the serpent perceptible only to the mind. I mean, this latter he also humbled and put under our feet, and caused us to trample on his head. Does he not indicate this to us in the words, "Walk on serpents and scorpions "? Then, lest we think these words refer to material serpents, he added, "and on all the power of the Enemy." [ Luke 10:19 ] Do you observe from the punishment inflicted on the devil's instrument God's exceeding love?

God judged that evil was to be held in check for a time rather than to be destroyed, so that he says to the serpent, "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and the seed of the woman. She shall watch for your head and you for her heel." Where enmities remain, there remains discord and the desire to do harm. Where there is the desire to do harm, there evil is established. Therefore there is discord between the serpent and the woman. Evil is at the base of discord; thus evil has not been taken away. Indeed, it has been reserved for the serpent, that he might watch for the woman's heel and the heel of her seed, so as to do harm and infuse his poison. Therefore let us not walk in earthly things, and the serpent will not be able to harm us. Let us put on sandals of the gospel that shut out the serpent's poison and blunt his bites that we may be provided with covering on our feet by the gospel.

Enmities are not set between the serpent and the man but between the serpent and the woman. This is surely not because he fails to deceive and tempt men, is it? On the contrary, it is clear that he does deceive them. Or is it because he did not deceive Adam but his woman? But is the serpent then not the enemy of the man to whom that deception came through his woman, especially since "I will place enmity between you and the woman" is stated in the future? If the reason is that he did not thereafter deceive Adam, it is also true that he did not thereafter deceive Eve. Hence, why does Scripture put it this way? To show clearly that we cannot be tempted by the devil except through that animal part, which reveals, so to speak, the image or exemplification of the woman in the one whole man.

I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed. The seed of the woman is the entire human race, the seed of the devil are the betrayers, who are depraved with his example of pride and rebellion. His seed is a perverse suggestion; the seed of the woman is the fruit of good work, by which the perverse suggestion is resisted. The enmity mentioned between this serpent and his seed, and how much the human race endures this enmity, and how much enmity all the elect exercise against him by living rightly, is clearer than the sun to all the faithful. A sign of this enmity appears even in the nature of the irrational serpent, which, because of the innate pestilence of its venom, exists always as an enemy to all living creatures and beasts of the earth: it is to be believed that from the time of this curse, and not before, this was implanted in it.

She will crush your head, and you will lie in wait for her heel. The woman crushes the head of the serpent, when the holy Church detects and scatters the devil's wiles and toxic suggestions from the very start, and as if trampling on him, reduces him to nothing. She crushes the serpent's head when she resists the pride through which Eve was deceived, often humbling under God's mighty hand: for the beginning of all sin is pride. The serpent lies in wait for her heel, because the devil, circling around the Church like a roaring lion, seeks whom he may devour, how he may overthrow the steps of our good actions. He lies in wait for the heel, when he tries to snatch us at the end of this present life. For the heel, which is the end of the body, not unjustly designates the end of our life, which both are also figuratively announced by the condition of the serpent, who is accustomed to be crushed by all who have the power, and he himself does not cease lying in wait to strike the heels of men.

The blessed Virgin possesses that price, because she is strong and valiant as one valiantly fighting. In Genesis: "The Lord said to the serpent: I will put enmities between you and the woman, and your seed and her seed; she shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for her heel." Bernard says of the glorious Virgin: "She crushed the head of the ancient serpent, when she reduced to nothing every suggestion of the evil one, both regarding the allurement of the flesh and the pride of the mind."

Do not allow the serpent to enter into your heart through suggestion; for Gregory says that when the head of the serpent has entered into any opening, then the whole body easily enters.

Man of old having sinned when the serpent in Paradise assailed him, it was said to him: He shall lie in wait for thy heel, but thou for his head; that is, Ye shall be divided and at enmity against each other, that man may not be under obedience to him. So the warfare was then waged on equal terms, each having the power to hurt the other; for the serpent watching for the heel of man, that is, besetting his path in order to hurt him on finding him out of the path, as he could do by creeping about his heel; while man being of upward stature and on his guard, and not straying from his path, was able to bruise the head of the serpent. And now having conquered the serpent and brought him finally to shame, and having through his agency unjustly endured death for the whole race, and nailed the bond against it to the cross and blotted it out, I rose again on the third day victorious over death, and became the champion who has achieved victory for all the human race, for through me the victory has been extended to all humanity. Be ye therefore of good courage. Behold, I have given you power to tread upon serpents and scorpions and on all the power of the enemy. He says in effect the serpent is no longer able to hurt your heel, being himself trampled down under your feet

"You are more cursed than all cattle because you deceived those who have authority over all cattle; and instead of being more astute than all other animals you shall be more cursed than all other animals, and you shall go about on your belly because you brought pangs upon womankind. And you shall eat dust all the days of your life [ Gen. 3:14 ] because you deprived Adam and Eve of the food of the Tree of Life. And I will place enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed [ Gen. 3:15 ] because by your fraudulent show of love you deceived and subjected both her and her children to death.

He then indicates the nature of the enmity which was placed between the serpent and the woman, between its seed and hers, saying, "It shall tread upon your head--which wanted to escape from subjugation to her seed--and you will strike it, not in its organ of hearing, but in its heel. " [ Gen. 3:15 ]

fairy tales do not give the child the idea of the evil or the ugly; that is in the child already, because it is in the world already. Fairy tales do not give the child his first idea of bogey. What fairy tales give the child is his first clear idea of the possible defeat of bogey. The baby has known the dragon intimately ever since he had an imagination. What the fairy tale provides for him is a St. George to kill the dragon.

Exactly what the fairy tale does is this: it accustoms him for a series of clear pictures to the idea that these limitless terrors had a limit, that these shapeless enemies have enemies in the knights of God, that there is something in the universe more mystical than darkness, and stronger than strong fear.

But there stood up in him still a kind of cold chivalry, a dignity of dead honour that would not forget the small and futile sword in his hand. He rushed at one of the colossal feet of this human tower, and when he came quite close to it the ankle-bone arched over him like a cave. Then he planted the point of his sword against the foot and leant on it with all his weight, till it went up to the hilt and broke the hilt, and then snapped just under it. And it was plain that the giant felt a sort of prick, for he snatched up his great foot into his great hand for an instant; and then, putting it down again, he bent over and stared at the ground until he had seen his enemy.

Then he picked up Jack between a big finger and thumb and threw him away; and as Jack went through the air he felt as if he were flying from system to system through the universe of stars. But, as the giant had thrown him away carelessly, he did not strike a stone, but struck soft mire by the side of a distant river. There he lay insensible for several hours; but when he awoke again his horrible conqueror was still in sight. He was striding away across the void and wooded plain towards where it ended in the sea; and by this time he was only much higher than any of the hills. He grew less and less indeed; but only as a really high mountain grows at last less and less when we leave it in a railway train. Half an hour afterwards he was a bright blue colour, as are the distant hills; but his outline was still human and still gigantic. Then the big blue figure seemed to come to the brink of the big blue sea, and even as it did so it altered its attitude. Jack, stunned and bleeding, lifted himself laboriously upon one elbow to stare. The giant once more caught hold of his ankle, wavered twice as in a wind, and then went over into the great sea which washes the whole world, and which, alone of all things God has made, was big enough to drown him.

He has therefore, in His work of recapitulation, summed up all things, both waging war against our enemy, and crushing him who had at the beginning led us away captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head, as thou canst perceive in Genesis that God said to the serpent, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; He shall be on the watch for thy head, and thou on the watch for His heel." For from that time, He who should be born of a woman, [namely] from the Virgin, after the likeness of Adam, was preached as keeping watch for the head of the serpent. This is the seed of which the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians, "that the law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made." This fact is exhibited in a still clearer light in the same Epistle, where he thus speaks: "But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman." For indeed the enemy would not have been fairly vanquished, unless it had been a man [born] of a woman who conquered him. For it was by means of a woman that he got the advantage over man at first, setting himself up as man's opponent. And therefore does the Lord profess Himself to be the Son of man, comprising in Himself that original man out of whom the woman was fashioned, in order that, as our species went down to death through a vanquished man, so we may ascend to life again through a victorious one; and as through a man death received the palm [of victory] against us, so again by a man we may receive the palm against death.

(Verse 15) He himself will keep your head, and you will keep his heel. It is better in Hebrew: He will crush your head, and you will crush his heel; for our steps are hindered by the serpent, and the Lord will quickly crush Satan under our feet.

Now, as to women's baptizing, we let you know that there is no small peril to those that undertake it. Therefore we do not advise you to it; for it is dangerous, or rather wicked and impious. For if the "man be the head of the woman," [1 Corinthians 11:3] and he be originally ordained for the priesthood, it is not just to abrogate the order of the creation, and leave the principal to come to the extreme part of the body. For the woman is the body of the man, taken from his side, and subject to him, from whom she was separated for the procreation of children. For says He, "He shall rule over you." [Genesis 3:16] For the principal part of the woman is the man, as being her head. But if in the foregoing constitutions we have not permitted them to teach, how will any one allow them, contrary to nature, to perform the office of a priest? For this is one of the ignorant practices of the Gentile atheism, to ordain women priests to the female deities, not one of the constitutions of Christ. For if baptism were to be administered by women, certainly our Lord would have been baptized by His own mother, and not by John; or when He sent us to baptize, He would have sent along with us women also for this purpose. But now He has nowhere, either by constitution or by writing, delivered to us any such thing; as knowing the order of nature, and the decency of the action; as being the Creator of nature, and the Legislator of the constitution.

There is no question about the punishment of the woman. For she clearly has her pains and sighs multiplied in the woes of this life. Although her bearing her children in pain is fulfilled in this visible woman, our consideration should nevertheless be recalled to that more hidden woman. For even in animals the females bear offspring with pain, and this is in their case the condition of mortality rather than the punishment of sin. Hence, it is possible that this be the condition of mortal bodies even in the females of humans. But this is the great punishment: they have come to the present bodily mortality from their former immortality. Still there is a great mystery in this sentence, because there is no restraint from carnal desire, which does not have pain in the beginning, until habit has been bent toward improvement. When this has come about, it is as though a child is born, that is, the good habit disposes our intentions toward the good deed. In order that this habit might be born, there was a painful struggle with bad habit. Scripture adds after the birth, "You will turn to your man, and he will rule over you." … What can this mean except that when that part of the soul held by carnal joys has, in willing to conquer a bad habit, suffered difficulty and pain and in this way brought forth a good habit, it now more carefully and diligently obeys reason as its husband? And taught by its pains, it turns to reason and willingly obeys its commands lest it again decline to some harmful habit.

Why, therefore, may we not assume that the first couple before they sinned could have given a command to their genital organs for the purpose of procreation as they did to the other members that the soul is accustomed to move to perform various tasks without any trouble and without any craving for pleasure? For the almighty Creator, worthy of praise beyond all words, who is great even in the least of his works, has given to the bees the power of reproducing their young just as they produce wax and honey. Why, then, should it seem beyond belief that he made the bodies of the first human beings in such a way that, if they had not sinned and had not immediately thereupon contracted a disease that would bring death, they would move the members by which offspring are generated in the same way that one commands his feet when he walks, so that conception would take place without disordered passions and birth without pain? But as it is, by disobeying God's command they deserved to experience in their members, where death now reigned, the movement of a law at war with the law of the mind. This is a movement that marriage regulates and continence controls and constrains, so that where punishment has followed sin, there correction may follow punishment.

He also said to the woman: "I will greatly multiply your sorrows and your conceptions. In pain you will bring forth your children." These words, spoken figuratively and prophetically, are much more properly understood as referring to the woman of God. Nevertheless, since the woman had not yet given birth, and the pain and groaning of childbirth is only from the body of death, which was conceived by the transgression of the commandment, this punishment is also referred to in the proper sense of the literal word: for it is in what follows: "And you will be under the power of the man, and he will rule over you." It is right to believe that the woman was made otherwise even before sin, except that the man should rule her, and she should live under his power; this servitude, therefore, can be interpreted correctly as one of condition rather than affection, so that even this kind of servitude, by which humans began to be servants to other humans, is found to have arisen from the punishment of sin. Indeed, the Apostle said: "By love serve one another" (Gal. 5:13); but he by no means said: "Dominate one another." Therefore, spouses can serve one another through love, but the Apostle does not allow the woman to dominate the man. This sentence rather pertains to the man, and the husband has merited dominion over the woman, not by nature, but by fault: but if this is not observed, the fault would be further corrupted and increased. These words are figuratively applicable to the Church, the spouse of Christ, whose sorrows are multiplied in this life after the guilt of the first transgression, so that she may reach eternal life purified; and her conceptions are multiplied when she strives to beget spiritual offspring for God by preaching and living rightly; hence it is said to the same offspring through an excellent preacher: "My little children, for whom I labor in birth again until Christ is formed in you" (Gal. 4:19). She brings forth children in pain, when, being solicitous, she fears, lest, as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, their minds be corrupted, and they fall from the simplicity which is in Christ. She acts under the power of the man, because she serves the Lord in fear and exults before him not in security, but with trembling: to whom, if she had never sinned, she would be united in the embrace of secure love. And he will rule over her, restraining her carnal impulses, and continually advancing her to the perception of heavenly life by the exercise of higher instruction, from which if she had never departed, she would always reign with him in shared freedom.

For the woman the punishment was doubled, because there was inflicted upon her the penalty of manifold hardships in conception, the penalty of pains in childbirth, and also the penalty of subjection to the man in married life. Since from the woman sin took its beginning, therefore her punishment is doubled. For because she was proud in mind, she incurred subjection; because she saw and desired the tree as sweet to eat, she incurred pain; finally, because she broke the yoke of obedience, she incurred the bond and burden of manifold hardship. And thus it is clear with what order the manifold punishments were inflicted by divine providence upon the man and doubled in the woman, so that "the disgrace of sin would not be without the beauty of justice."

Now even though the sentence imposed on the serpent was justly decreed--for punishment reverts to where the crime originated--nevertheless the full reason God began with this despicable creature was so that Adam and Eve might become afraid and repent while Justice was appeasing its anger on the serpent: then there would be an opportunity for Grace to hold them back from Justice's curses. When the serpent had been cursed, however, and Adam and Eve still did not ask forgiveness, God then came with punishment. He came to Eve, since it was by her hand that the sin had been handed over to Adam. Thus he decreed as follows against Eve: "I will greatly multiply your pains and your conceptions, and you shall give birth to children with pangs." [ Gen. 3:16 ]

Even though she would have given birth to children anyway--seeing that she had received the blessing of childbirth along with all creatures--nevertheless she would not have given birth to many children, because those whom she bore would have remained immortal. And she would have been spared the pangs of birthgiving, the anguish of their upbringing and the lamentations at their deaths.

"And you shall turn to your husband" --to be counseled, and not to counsel-- "and he shall have authority over you" [ Gen. 3:16 ] -- since you imagined that by eating the fruit you would from then onward have authority over him.

The punishment decreed against the serpent was justly decreed. Why? Because it was fitting that punishment return to the place where folly begins. The entire reason God began with this impious creature was so that, when justice appeased its anger on this creature, Adam and Eve should grow afraid and repent so that there might be a possibility for grace to preserve them from the curses of justice. But when the serpent had been cursed and Adam and Eve had still made no supplication, God came to them with punishment. He came to Eve first, because it was through her that the sin was handed on to Adam.

(Verse 16) I will multiply your sorrows and your groanings. For sorrow and groaning, it has pains and conception in Hebrew.

And for your conversion. Regarding the conversion of Aquila, the society: Symmachus transferred the desire or impulse.

Let us turn again, if you don't mind, to the woman. You see, since it was the serpent that was the cause of the deception, accordingly he was the first to incur punishment; and since he deceived her first, and she then dragged her husband down with her, she is punished first, receiving that punishment which carries with it lengthy admonition: "He said to the woman: 'I will greatly aggravate the pain of your labor, in pain you will bear children; your yearning will be for your husband, and he will be your master.'" [ Gen 3:16 ] See the Lord's goodness, how much mildness he employs despite such a terrible fall. "I will greatly aggravate the pain of your labor." My intention had been, he is saying, for you to have a life free of trouble and distress, rid of all pain and grief, filled with every pleasure and with no sense of bodily needs despite your bodily condition. But since you misused such indulgence, and the abundance of good things led you into such ingratitude, accordingly I impose this curb on you to prevent your further running riot, and I sentence you to painful labor. "I will greatly aggravate the pain of your labor, in pain you will bear children." I will ensure, he is saying, that the generation of children, a reason for great satisfaction, for you will begin with pain so that each time without fail you will personally have a reminder, through the distress and the pain of each birth, of the magnitude of this sin of disobedience, and may not in the course of time allow the event to slip into oblivion, but may be enabled to realize that the deception was the cause of these ills. Hence "I will greatly aggravate the pain of your labor, in pain you will bear children." In this passage he refers to the pangs of labor and in that great distress there is no avoiding carrying the child all those months like some load, feeling each twinge of pain that is caused by that, the twitching of its limbs, and the unbearable pangs known only to those who go through the experience. Nevertheless, however, the loving God offered comfort with the pain, so that the satisfaction of bearing the child equally matched those pangs that tortured the womb all those months. I mean, women who are subjected to such distress, are so tormented by the bouts of pain, and, so to say, even despair of life itself, enjoy after the birth satisfaction even in their distress: as though forgetting all that has happened, they give themselves again to the bearing of children, according to the loving God's providence for the maintenance of human beings' welfare. You see, the expectation of future benefits makes us always bear the distress of the present time with ease. You would see this trial affecting travellers as well, as they cross the mighty oceans and put up with shipwreck and pirates; despite those many dangers and the disappointment of their hopes they in no way give up, but rather press on to wards the same goal. The same thing can be said also of farmers: when they dig deep furrows, till the earth with great care and sow the seed liberally, there frequently occurs drought or flooding, or at the conclusion of the harvesting rust descends on the crop and they lose hope; yet they still don't give up at this point, but when better times come they resume their farming. And you would find this happening in the case of every occupation. Well, in just the same way, woman too, in her turn, despite all those months, despite the unspeakable pains, despite the sleepless nights, despite the twitching of limbs, or through some slight accident she gives birth prematurely to the child in an undeveloped state and unrecognizable, or if fully developed yet handicapped, or unhealthy, or even in many cases stillborn, scarcely escaping risk to her own life yet despite all this she puts up with the same trouble again, as though oblivious of all these pangs, and she undergoes the same process again. Why do I say the same process? Often it happens that the woman dies with the child, yet this event does not worry other women or induce them to avoid the experience such being the pleasure and satisfaction of nasty combined together with the pains. Hence he said, "I will greatly aggravate the pain of your labor, in pain you will bear children." This is what Christ also talked about with his disciples, showing them the intensity of the pain and the great degree of satisfaction, when he said, "A woman in labor suffers for the reason that her time has come;" then, wanting to bring home to us how the element of suffering is suddenly removed whereas its place is taken by joy and happiness, he said, "But when she has given birth to the child, she no longer remembers the distress for joy that a human being has been born into the world." [ John 16:21 ] Do you see the exceeding care? Do you see punishment accompanied by admonition? "In pain you will bear children;" then, "Your yearning will be for your husband, and he will be your master." As if to explain his reasons to the woman, the loving God said this, meaning, In the beginning I created you equal in esteem to your husband, and my intention was that in everything you would share with him as an equal, and as I entrusted control of everything to your husband, so did I to you; but you abused your equality of status. Hence I subject you to your husband: "Your yearning will be for your husband, and he will be your master." Because you abandoned your equal, who was sharer with you in the same nature and for whom you were created, and you chose to enter into conversation with that evil created the serpent, and to take the advice he had to give, accordingly I now subject you to him in future and designate him as your master for you to recognize his lordship, and since you did not know how to rule, learn well how to be ruled. "Your yearning will be for your husband, and he will be your master." It is better that you be subject to him and fall under his lordship than that enjoying freedom and authority, you would be cast into the abyss. It would be more useful also for a horse to carry the bit and travel under direction than without this to fall down a cliff. Accordingly, considering what is advantageous, I want you to have yearning for him and, like a body being directed by its head, to recognize his lordship pleasurably.

See the Lord's goodness, how much mildness he employs despite such a terrible fall. "I will greatly aggravate the pain of your labor." My intention had been, he is saying, for you to have a life free of trouble and distress, rid of all pain and grief, filled with every pleasure and with no sense of bodily needs despite your bodily condition. But since you misused such indulgence, and the abundance of good things led you into such ingratitude, accordingly I impose this curb on you to prevent your further running riot, and I sentence you to painful labor. "I will greatly aggravate the pain of your labor; in pain you will bear children." I will ensure, he is saying, that the generation of children, a reason for great satisfaction, for you will begin with pain so that each time without fail you will personally have a reminder, through the distress and the pain of each birth, of the magnitude of this sin of disobedience.… In the beginning I created you equal in esteem to your husband, and my intention was that in everything you would share with him as an equal, and as I entrusted control of everything to your husband, so did I to you; but you abused your equality of status. Hence I subject you to your husband.

Virginity was practiced in paradise. Indeed, sacred Scripture says that "they were naked, to wit, Adam and Eve, and were not ashamed." However, once they had fallen, they knew that they were naked, and being ashamed they sewed together aprons for themselves. After the fall, when Adam heard "Dust thou art, and unto dust you shall return," and death entered into the world through transgression, then Adam knew his wife, who conceived and brought forth. And so to keep the race from dwindling and being destroyed by death, marriage was devised, so that by the begetting of children the race of men might be preserved.

Up to the fall of man, therefore, from the beginning God was simply good; after that He became a judge both severe and, as the Marcionites will have it, cruel. Woman is at once condemned to bring forth in sorrow, and to serve her husband, Genesis 3:16 although before she had heard without pain the increase of her race proclaimed with the blessing, Increase and multiply, and although she had been destined to be a help and not a slave to her male partner. [Against Marcion 2.11]

The two sentences seem to have a certain similarity, yet in that similarity there is a great difference. There is a difference in the way a person eats of the earth, as the serpent is related to have done and the manner in which this is recorded of the man: 'In sadness shall you eat.' That very phrase 'in sadness' makes the precise difference. Note how important this difference is. It is for my benefit that I should eat the earth in sadness rather than with delight, that is to say, that I should appear to feel a certain sadness in my bodily acts and senses rather than experience pleasure in sin. Many, in fact, because of their manifold iniquities have no awareness of sin. But he who says: ' I chastise my body and bring it into subjection,' [ 1 Cor 9:27 ] feels sadness because of regret for the sins to which we are subject. He himself did not have such serious faults for which he ought to feel sorrow. Hence he teaches us that that kind of sorrow is of value which has, not this world, but God, as its end. It is right, he says, that you become sorrowful, so as to feel repentance in the face of God: ' For the sorrow that is according to God produces salvation, whereas the sorrow that is according to the world produces death.' [ 2 Cor 7:9,10 ] Take note of those who in the Old Testament were sorrowful in the midst of their bodily labors and who attained grace, while those who found delight in such pleasures continued to be punished. Hence the Hebrews, who groaned in the works of Egypt, [ Exod 2:23 ] attained the grace of the just and those ' who ate bread with mourning and fear,' [ Tob 2:5 ] were supplied with spiritual good. The Egyptians, on the other hand, who, in their service to a detestable king, carried out such works with joy, received no favor. [ Exod 16:14-18 ]

What shall we say about the judgment pronounced against the man? Are we perhaps to think that the rich, for whom the necessities of life come easily and who do not labor on the earth, have escaped this punishment? It says, "The earth will be cursed for you in all your works, and you shall eat from it in sadness and groaning all the days of your life. It will bring forth thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the grain of your field. In the sweat of your brow you will eat your bread until you return to the earth from which you were taken, for you are earth, and you will return to the earth." It is certainly clear that no one escapes this sentence. For anyone born in this life has difficulty in discovering the truth because of the corruptible body. For as Solomon says, "The body that is corrupted weighs down the soul, and the earthly habitation presses down the mind that thinks many thoughts." These are the labors and sorrows that man has from the earth. The thorns and thistles are the prickings of torturous questions or thoughts concerned with providing for this life.

But to Adam he said: Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten from the tree concerning which I commanded you not to eat, cursed is the ground because of you. In toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life, thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, and you shall eat the plants of the field, etc. Who is ignorant that these are the labors upon the earth of the human race, and that they would not be if the happiness that was in paradise had been maintained? For by the sin of man the earth was cursed, so that it would bring forth thorns, not that it itself would feel punishment because it is without sensation, but in order that the crime of human sin might always be placed before men's eyes, so that they might be reminded to turn away from sins at some point, and turn towards God's commandments. Indeed, poisonous herbs were created for the punishment or the discipline of mortals. And this must be noted because of sin, for we became mortal after sin. We are also mocked through unfruitful trees, so that we may understand how shameful it is to be without the fruit of good works in the field of God, that is, in the Church, and so that we may fear lest God abandon us, because they themselves abandon unfruitful trees in their fields, nor do they apply any cultivation to them. Therefore, before the sin of man it is not written that the earth brought forth anything except herb for feeding and fruitful trees; but after sin we see many horrible and unfruitful things grow, for the reason we have mentioned. Mystically indeed, the earth which is said to have been cursed in the work of Adam's transgression is better understood as the flesh. For now it brings forth thorns and thistles for us, because propagated by the lust of the flesh, we suffer the stings and incitements of sins from the flesh itself.

By divine judgment, the man incurred the penalty of labor and anguish, the penalty of hunger and want, the penalty of death and dissolution into dust, as Scripture says: Cursed is the earth in your work. Because the man, having despised the supreme delectable, sought to delight in the flesh, therefore by the just judgment of God there was inflicted upon him labor and the want of hunger and thirst. Since the First Principle is most provident in governing and most upright in presiding, it leaves nothing whatsoever disordered in the universe; and since fault is rightly ordered through punishment, therefore immediately in the first parents the disgrace of sin was followed by the dignity of judgment, so that what was disordered by falling from the order of nature might fall immediately into the order of justice. For this twofold order so embraces all things that what falls from the one relapses into the other.

Since the Fall no organization or way of life whatever has a natural tendency to go right. In the Middle Ages some people thought that if only they entered a religious order they would find themselves automatically becoming holy and happy: the whole native literature of the period echoes with the exposure of that fatal error. In the nineteenth century some people thought that monogamous family life would automatically make them holy and happy; the savage antidomestic literature of modern times—the Samuel Butlers, the Gosses, the Shaws—delivered the answer. In both cases the "debunkers" may have been wrong about principles and may have forgotten the maxim abusus non tollit usum: but in both cases they were pretty right about matter of fact. Both family life and monastic life were often detestable, and it should be noticed that the serious defenders of both are well aware of the dangers and free of the sentimental illusion. The author of the Imitation of Christ knows (no one better) how easily monastic life goes wrong. Charlotte M. Yonge makes it abundantly clear that domesticity is no passport to heaven on earth but an arduous vocation—a sea full of hidden rocks and perilous ice shores only to be navigated by one who uses a celestial chart. That is the first point on which we must be absolutely clear. The family, like the nation, can be offered to God, can be converted and redeemed, and will then become the channel of particular blessings and graces. But, like everything else that is human, it needs redemption. Unredeemed, it will produce only particular temptations, corruptions, and miseries. Charity begins at home: so does un-charity.

After He had decreed concerning Eve and repentance failed to spring up in Adam, He then turned to him as well in punishment, saying, " Because you listened to the voice of your wife and were wheedled into eating of the Tree from which I told you not to eat, cursed is the earth because of you. " [ Gen. 3:17 ]

(Verse 17.) Cursed is the ground because of your actions. The works here do not refer to cultivating the land, as many think, but rather sins are signified. As it is written in Hebrew: And Aquila does not disagree, saying: Cursed is the soil because of you. And Theodotion: Cursed is the earth because of your transgression.

l know that you are wearied by the excess of words, but stir yourselves a little, I beseech you, lest we leave the sentence incomplete and depart while the judge is still sitting. We are in fact close to the end now. So let us see what he says to the man after the woman, and what kind of punishment he inflicts on him. "Whereas to Adam he said: 'Because you listened to your wife's words and ate from this one tree I told you not to eat from, accursed shall be the soil as you till it. In pain may you eat from it all the days of your life. Thorns and thistles let it yield you, and you are to eat the grass of the field. In the sweat of your brow may you eat your bread until you return to the soil whence you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you are to return." [ Gen 3:17, Gen 3:18, Gen 3:19 ] Great is the Lord's care and beyond all telling displayed here for the human being but let us listen precisely to each word spoken. "Whereas to Adam he said: 'Because you listened to your wife's words and ate from this one tree I told you not to eat from." Since you listened to your wife, he is saying, and ate from the tree, and put the advice from her ahead of my command and weren't prepared to keep away from this one single tree which I told you not to eat from (surely, after all, I didn't bid you keep away from many? one only and yet you couldn't keep away from that, but forgot my commands and were overborne by your wife). Hence you are to learn through your very labors how much evil you have committed. Let men give good heed, let women give good heed the former, that they may have nothing to do with those people advising evil actions, and the latter, that they may ad vise nothing of the sort. I mean, if Adam shifted the blame on to his wife and was still considered incapable of any excuse, what kind of defense could anyone offer in the claim, "It was on account of my wife that I sinned in this way and that, and committed this sin and that "? After all, the reason that she came under your dominion and you were declared her master was that she should follow your lead, not for the head to follow the feet. Frequently, however, it is possible to see the opposite occurring, that the one who is supposed to be in the position of head doesn't even keep to the position of the feet, whereas she who is in the position of the feet is installed in the position of head. Hence also blessed Paul, the world's teacher, foresaw all this and cried out, "How, after all, can you be sure, wife, whether you will save your husband? And how can you be sure, husband, whether you will save your wife?" [ I Cor 7:16 ] Still, let a husband be very much on his guard so as to resist his wife's inducement to harmful behavior, and let a wife keep fresh in mind the punishment Eve received for plying her husband with harmful advice, and not presume to offer such advice nor imitate Eve, but rather bring him to his senses by her example and encourage him to that kind of behavior that will discharge herself and her husband of any punishment or penalty. But let us return to the text before us. "Whereas to Adam he said: 'Because you listened to your wife's words and ate from this one tree I told you not to eat from.'" Because, he is saying, you displayed such indifference about keeping the command given by me, and neither fear nor my intervening to decree the punishment liable to happen to you for eating the fruit was of any benefit, but in fact you ran headlong into such terrible wickedness that you were unable to keep away from that single tree despite such great enjoyment, accordingly "'accursed shall be the soil as you till it.'" See the Lord's loving kindness, how he punishes the serpent one way and this rational being a different way: to the former he says, "'Accursed are you beyond the earth,'" whereas in this case he doesn't speak in that way. What, then? "'Accursed shall be the soil as you till it.'" Appropriately, too. You see, since the soil had been produced for the sake of the human being so that he might thus be able to enjoy what sprang from it, accordingly in turn he places a curse on it on account of the human being's sin; because the curse on it impairs in turn the human being's relaxation and tranquillity, he says, "Accursed shall be the soil as you till it." "accursed" means, he added, "'In pain may you eat from it all the days of your life.'" See how each punishment is extended for a lifetime, so that not only may they personally be the better off for it, but that those destined to follow in future may learn from these very events whence the source of this punishment derived in their case: "'In pain,'" he says, "'may you eat from it all the days of your life.'" Then, to teach us more precisely the kind of curse and the cause of the pain, he added, "Thorns and thistles let it yield you." [ Gen 3:18 ] Behold the reminders of the curse: thorns it will bring forth, he says, and thistles so as to give rise to great labor and discomfort, and I will ensure you pass the whole time with pain so that this experience may prove a brake on your getting ideas above your station and you may instead have a thought to your own makeup and never again bear to be deceived in these matters. "You are to eat of the grass of the field. In the sweat of your brow may you eat your bread." See how after his disobedience everything is imposed on him in an opposite way to his former life style: My intention in bringing you into the world, he is saying, was that you should live your life without pain or toil, difficulty or sweat, and that you should be in a state of enjoyment and prosperity, and not be subject to the needs of the body but be free from all such and have the good fortune to experience complete freedom. Since, however, such indulgence was of no benefit to you, accordingly I curse the ground so that it will not in future yield its harvest as be fore without tilling and ploughing; instead, I invest you with great labor, toil and difficulty, and with unremitting pain and despair, and I am ensuring that everything you do is achieved only by sweat so that under pressure from these you may have continual guidance in keeping to limits and recognizing your own makeup. Nor will this continue for a short period or a brief space of time: it will last all your life. "In the sweat of your brow may you eat your bread until you return to the soil whence you were taken; for dust you are, and to dust you are to return." [ Gen 3:19 ] You will endure this as long as the span of your life is extended and you decompose into the material you were formed from. You see, even though in my loving kindness I endowed you with a bodily nature, yet your body being from the earth will in turn revert to the earth. "For dust you are, and to dust you are to return "' After all, to pre vent this happening I said, "'Do not touch the tree," explaining that "on the day you eat of it you will truly die." You see, this was not my intention; on the contrary, everything on my part was carried through, but you appropriated it for your self so don't attribute the blame to anyone else, but put it down to your own indifference. At this point, however, a further question arises for us, which, if you don't mind, we'll dispose of immediately at this stage and bring the sermon to a close. God said, the text tells us, "On the day you eat from it you will truly die;" yet they are shown living for a great number of years after the disobedience and tasting the food. This seems to pose a problem for those who read the subject matter superficially; if however you give your attention to it in the proper spirit, the verse is clear and offers no problem to the student. You see, even if they lived a long time, nevertheless from the time they heard the words, "Dust you are, and to dust you are to return," and received the sentence of death, they became liable to death and you would say front that moment they were dead. So this is what Scripture is also implying when it says that "on the day you eat, you will truly die" that is to say, receive the sentence of being mortal from now on. I moral, just as in the case of human tribunals, when someone receives the sentence of beheading and is cast into prison, even if he stays there a long time his life is no better than that of dead people and corpses, being already dead by reason of his sentence, in just the same way they, too, from the day they received the sentence of mortality were dead by reason of their sentence, even if they lasted a long time. I know that our words have been numerous and the thread of our teaching has been drawn out to great length. Hence, since by the grace of God and to the extent of our ability we have proposed everything to you and brought to a Conclusion the subject matter we read about, let us at this point close the sermon. It would, in fact, have been possible for us to propose other matters, illustrating further that the imposition of that very punishment and their being made liable to death was a mark of great depths of loving kindness. But in case we smother your thinking with a great surfeit of words, come now, let us encourage you as you leave here not to give your time to brainless gatherings or to improper gossiping; instead, reflect privately and rehearse with one an other what has been said, reminding yourselves of what the judge said in reply, what defense the guilty made, how the man shifted the blame on to the woman and she shifted it to the serpent, how God punished that creature and the fact that he inflicted on it the punishment that would be constant and lasting for all time, that in its regard he delivered a severe denunciation and thus demonstrated his care for those deceived. You see, from the fact that he punished their deceiver it is clear that he had practiced his deception on people very dear to God. Next recall from this text the sentence on the woman and the punishment inflicted on her, or rather the admonition and thus recall the words addressed to Adam, remembering the sentence, "Dust you are, and to dust you are to return;" find cause for wonder in this at God's ineffable love, that we, though coming from dust and decomposing into it, are deemed worthy, should we wish to embrace virtue and shun evil, of those unspeakable good things prepared for those who love him, "which eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor have they entered man's heart." [ I Cor 2:9 ] Consequently, we ought to pay the Lord abundant thanks for his so generous favors and never consign them to oblivion; instead, through good works and careful avoidance of foul deeds let us win his approval and render him well disposed to us. I mean, how could we avoid the appearance of ingratitude if, while he who is God and immortal does not decline to take on himself our mortal nature and earthly character, free us from the ancient curse of death, lead us to highest heaven, honor us with his ancestral home and deem us worthy of being honored by all the heavenly host, whereas we are not ashamed to requite him in just the opposite way, glueing our immortal soul (so to say) on to our body and thus ensuring that it becomes earthly, perishable and impotent? Let us not, I beseech you, be so ungrateful to such a constant benefactor of ours; let us rather keep his laws and perform what he has decided and is well pleasing to him, so that he may declare us worthy also of eternal goods. May we all be judged deserving of such goods, thanks to the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be glory, power and honor, now and forever for ages of ages. Amen.

After all, you are head of your wife, and she has been created for your sake; but you have inverted the proper order: not only have you failed to keep her on the straight and narrow but you have been dragged down with her, and whereas the rest of the body should follow the head, the contrary has in fact occurred, the head following the rest of the body, turning things upside down.

Since man had shown great disobedience, God cast him forth from his life in paradise. God curbed man's spirit for the future, so that he might not leap farther away. He condemned him to a life of toil and labor, speaking to him in some such fashion as this: "The ease and security that were yours in abundance led you to this great disobedience. They made you forget my commandments. You had nothing to do. That led you to think thoughts too haughty for your own nature.… Therefore, I condemn you to toil and labor, so that while tilling the earth, you may never forget your disobedience and the vileness of your nature."

Behold the reminders of the curse: thorns it will bring forth, he says, and thistles so as to give rise to great labor and discomfort, and I will ensure you pass the whole time with pain so that this experience may prove a brake on your getting ideas above your station, and you may instead have a thought to your own makeup and never again bear to be deceived in these matters."You are to eat of the grass of the field. In the sweat of your brow may you eat yourbread." See how after his disobedience everything is imposed on him in an opposite way to his former life style: My intention in bringing you into the world, he is saying, was that you should live your life without pain or toil, difficulty or sweat, and that you should be in a state of enjoyment and prosperity, and not be subject to the needs of the body but be free from all such and have the good fortune to experience complete freedom. Since, however, such indulgence was of no benefit to you, accordingly I curse the ground so that it will not in future yield its harvest as before without tilling and ploughing. Instead I invest you with great labor, toil and difficulty, and with unremitting pain and despair, and I am ensuring that everything you do is achieved only by sweat so that under pressure from these you may have continual guidance in keeping to limits and recognizing your own makeup.

Adam was created pure by God for his service. All these creatures were given to him to serve him. He was destined to be the lord and king of all creatures. But when the evil word came to him and conversed with him, he first received it through an external hearing. Then it penetrated into his heart and took charge of his whole being. When he was thus captured, creation, which ministered and served him, was captured with him.

Immediately the earth is also cursed, Genesis 3:18 which before was blessed. Immediately spring up briers and thorns, where once had grown grass, and herbs, and fruitful trees. Immediately arise sweat and labour for bread, where previously on every tree was yielded spontaneous food and untilled nourishment. [Agaist Marcion 2.11]

To what kind of a crown, I ask you, did Christ Jesus submit for the salvation of both sexes? He who is the head of man and the glory of woman and the husband of the church—what kind of crown? It was made from thorns and thistles. They stood as a symbol of the sins that the soil of the flesh brought forth for us but that the power of the cross removed, blunting every sting of death since the head of the Lord bore its pain. And beside the symbol, we are reminded also of the scornful abuse, the degradation and the vileness of his cruel tormentors.

There, too, is that distinction between the serpent who is said to eat the earth and Adam, to whom God said: ' You shall eat in sadness the herbs of the field.' [ Gen 3:18 ] We may note here a certain gradation. When we eat the earth, it seems that we are in a sort of warfare. when we eat the herbs, there is a certain advance. when finally, we eat bread, then our life of trial has reached it terminus. Let us experience a series of advancements in this life as Paul did: ' It is now no longer I that live,' that is, not I who before this ate the earth, not I who ate grass, for 'all flesh is grass,' but 'Christ lives in me.' [ Gal 2:20 ] This signifies that living bread which comes from heaven, [ John 6:50 ] and that wisdom, too is living, together with grace, justice, and resurrection. Again, consider the fact that it is the serpent and not man who is cursed. And the earth is not curses in itself but is 'cursed in your work.' This is said in refernece to the soul. The earth is cursed if your works are earthly, that is of this world. It is not cursed as a whole. It will merely bring forth thorns and thistles, if it is not diligently cared.

Still another problem arises. "From what source did death come to Adam? Was it from the nature of a tree of this sort or actually from God?" If we ascribe this to the nature of the tree, then the fruit of this tree seems to be superior to the vivifying power of the breath of God, since its fruit would have drawn into death's toils him on whom the divine breath had bestowed life. If we maintain that God is the responsible cause of death, then we can be held to accuse him of inconsistency. We seem to accuse him of being so devoid of beneficence as to be unwilling to pardon when he had the power to do so or of being powerless if he was unable to forgive. Let us see, therefore, how this question can be resolved. The solution, unless I am mistaken, lies in the fact that since disobedience was the cause of death, for that very reason not God but man himself was the agent of his own death. If, for example, a physician were to prescribe to a patient what he thought should be avoided, and if the patient felt that these prohibitions were unnecessary, the physician is not responsible for the patient's death. Surely in that case the patient is guilty of causing his own death. Hence God as a good physician forbade Adam to eat what would be injurious to him.

By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return. Here, understand that bread to be the one who says: I am the bread of life, who came down from heaven (John 6:51); which we eat by the sweat of our face, because we ascend to the sight of divine exaltation only through the labor of necessary affliction.

Because on account of the good of the flesh man chose to be separated from the good of the mind, therefore by the just judgment of God the soul is unwillingly separated from the flesh through death and incineration—and through this, just as God had given to man according to the order of nature a body subject to the soul, capable of propagation without lust, capable of sustenance without failing, incapable of change without death intervening, so, when man sinned, according to the order of justice it came about that He withdrew all the aforesaid and inflicted their opposites: so that fault might not remain unpunished and disordered, which divine providence ought in no way to permit.

As to the objection that man from his original condition was ordained to this work, it must be said that no man ought to be without labor in this life, lest perhaps what is said of the reprobate in the Psalm be said of him: They are not in the labor of men, and with men they shall not be scourged: but from this it does not follow that one must be occupied with manual labor, and especially that which is lucrative. And through this the response to the objection about the example of Adam is clear, because it is certain that not all are obligated to the work of agriculture. Nor was that which is said: In the sweat of your face, etc., said then as a precept of life, but as a punishment for sin committed, as is clear from the following text.

What man lost by the Fall was his original specific nature. "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." The total organism which had been taken up into his spiritual life was allowed to fall back into the merely natural condition from which, at his making, it had been raised... Thus human spirit from being the master of human nature became a mere lodger in its own house, or even a prisoner; rational consciousness became what it now is--a fitful spot-light resting on a small part of the cerebral motions.

Although it was the earth, which had not done wrong, which was smitten instead of Adam, who had done wrong, nevertheless it was Adam, who is subject to suffering, whom He caused to suffer by means of the curse on the earth, which is not subject to suffering; for it was because of the earth's being cursed that Adam, who had not been directly cursed, was cursed. Thus he did not escape punishment at the curse which the earth received, for God decreed concerning him too, as follows: "With pains shall you eat of it all the days of your life" [ Gen3:17 ] --that is, after breaking the commandment, though you would have eaten of it without any pains had the commandment been kept. "Thorns and thistles" [ Gen3:18 ] will it bring forth after the sin, things which it would not have brought forth had there been no sin. "You shall eat herbage of the field," [ Gen3:18 ] because through your wife's slight enticement you have rejected Paradise's delectable fruits. "With the sweat of your face will you eat bread," [ Gen3:19 ] because it did not please you to enjoy yourself without any toil in the delights of the Garden. All this will be your portion "until you return to the earth whence you were taken," [ Gen3:19 ] seeing that you despised the commandment which, at the very present moment, might have given you eternal life, by means of the fruit of the Tree of Life which you would have been permitted to eat. Since you originate from dust and you forgot yourself, "you shall return to " [ Gen3:19 ] your "dust " and your true being shall be recognized through your low estate "

Even Satan, who was created within these six days along with the womb to which he belonged, was fair until the sixth day, just as Adam and Eve were fair up to the time they transgressed the commandment. Now Satan, who had become Satan in secret on this day, was also secretly sentenced and condemned the same day; for God did not wish to make known his judgment in the presence of the pair who were not aware of his having tempted them--the woman said "It was the serpent," and not Satan, "who led me astray." So Satan was judged secretly, and in him all his hosts were condemned. For since the sin was so great, and any one of them alone would have been too insignificant for the punishment--just as birth pangs were decreed for Eve along with her daughters, and pains and death for Adam and his children, and for the serpent it was decreed that it and all its seed should be trampled--so it was decreed against Satan who was in the serpent that he should go to the fire along with all his hosts. For in the New Testament our Lord revealed what had been hidden in the old, when he said, "Concerning the judgment of the ruler of this world, he is judged," that is, he is condemned." [ John 16:11 ]

My friend, the human race is always trying this dodge of making everything entirely easy; but the difficulty which it shifts off one thing it shifts on to another. ... Whoever made it, who is wiser, and we hope better than we, made it under strange limitations, and with painful conditions of pleasure. In the first and darkest of its books it is fiercely written that a man shall not eat his cake and have it; and though all men talked until the stars were old it would still be true that a man who has lost his razor could not shave with it. But every now and then men jump up with the new something or other and say that everything can be had without sacrifice, that bad is good if you are only enlightened, and that there is no real difference between being shaved and not being shaved.

But this, dearest brothers, we must greatly consider on this solemnity: that on this day the handwriting of our condemnation has been blotted out, the sentence of our corruption has been changed. For that nature to which it was said, "You are earth, and to earth you will go," today went to heaven.

Our flesh indeed is considered by the uneducated and by unbelievers to perish so completely after death that nothing whatever of its substance is left. We, however, who believe in its resurrection, know that death only causes a change in it and that its substance certainly persists and is restored to life again at a definite time by the will of its Creator and once more undergoes a transformation. What was at first flesh, "from the earth, a man of dust," and was then dissolved through death and again made dust and ashes—for "dust you are," it is written, "and unto dust shall you return"—is raised again from the earth. Afterwards, as the merits of the indwelling soul shall demand, the person advances to the glory of a spiritual body.

Scripture says, "A consecrated linen tunic will be put on." Think of flax thread that comes from the earth. Imagine that the flax thread becomes a sanctified linen tunic that Christ, the true high priest, puts on when he takes up the nature of an earthly body. Remember that it is said about the body that "it is earth and it will go into the earth." Therefore, my Lord and Savior, wanting to resurrect that which had gone into the earth, took an earthly body that he might carry it raised up from earth to heaven. And the assertion in the law that the high priest is clothed "with a linen tunic" contains this mystery. But that it added "consecrated" must not be heard as superfluous. For the "tunic" that was the flesh of Christ was "consecrated," for it was not conceived from the seed of man but begotten of the Holy Spirit.

We say, therefore, that the body falls to the ground by death, as indeed facts themselves show, in accordance with the law of God. For to the body it was said, ("Till you return to the ground, for out of it were you taken; for) dust you are, and unto dust shall you return." That, therefore, which came from the ground shall return to the ground. Now that falls down which returns to the ground; and that rises again which falls down. "Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection." 1 Corinthians 15:21 Here in the word man, who consists of bodily substance, as we have often shown already. [Against Marcion 5.9] Now, although the clay is offensive (for its poorness), it is now something else. What I possess is flesh, not earth, even although of the flesh it is said: "Dust you are, and unto dust shall you return." In these words there is the mention of the origin, not a recalling of the substance. The privilege has been granted to the flesh to be nobler than its origin, and to have happiness aggrandized by the change wrought in it. Now, even gold is earth, because of the earth; but it remains earth no longer after it becomes gold, but is a far different substance, more splendid and more noble, though coming from a source which is comparatively faded and obscure. In like manner, it was quite allowable for God that He should clear the gold of our flesh from all the taints, as you deem them, of its native clay, by purging the original substance of its dross.[On the Resurrection of the Flesh 6]

Because the devil was envious and the woman was gullible, humankind was immediately cast out of paradise. It was made to walk the very earth from which Adam had just been created, inheriting sweat, toil and hard labor. Along with Adam, the earth and all living things that followed were subjected to evil, being restrained like a horse that is bridled. For since Adam did not use good judgment during the age of paradise—an age which was free from sorrow and pain—he was joined to adversity. Through his suffering he might then get rid of the disease which had come upon him in the midst of paradise.By punishing us with death, the lawgiver cut off the spread of sin. And yet through that very punishment he also demonstrated his love for us. He bound sin and death together when he gave the law, placing the sinner under punishment of death. And yet he ordered things in such a way that the punishment might in itself serve the goal of salvation. For death brings about separation from this life and brings evil works to an end. It sets us free from labor, sweat and pain, and ends the suffering of the body. Thus the Judge mixes his love for us with punishment.

And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. And it is established that Adam gave his wife this name by divine instinct, which very fittingly corresponds to the Holy Church, in whose unity alone, which is called Catholic, the door to life is open to all.

The woman who initiated transgression was called "Life," because she was responsible for the succession of those who came to birth and sinned. She thus became mother of the righteous and unrighteous alike. Each one of us shows himself to be just or willfully renders himself disobedient.

With that manifest knowledge which God gave to Adam, whereby he gave names to Eve and to the animals, God did not reveal the discoveries of things that were concealed; but in the case of that hidden knowledge from the stars downward, Adam was able to pursue enquiry into all that is within this universe.

(Verse 20) And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she is the mother of all living. Therefore, Eve, which means life, is called so, because she is the mother of all living. Eve indeed translates to life.

See the precision of Sacred Scripture, how it didn't pass over even this detail, but taught us that Adam named his wife as well. "He called his wife Eve, which means life," the text says, you see, "because she was the mother of all the living" that is to say, she is the source of all those who will come from her, the root and foundation of the future race. Then, after teaching us the naming of the woman, it further shows us God's goodness, how he does not overlook them in their depth of shame and nakedness after being created by him.

Now, certainly nothing else is raised than that which is sown; and nothing else is sown than that which decays in the ground; and it is nothing else than the flesh which is decayed in the ground. For this was the substance which God's decree demolished, "Earth you are, and to earth shall you return;" Genesis 3:19 because it was taken out of the earth. And it was from this circumstance that the apostle borrowed his phrase of the flesh being "sown," since it returns to the ground, and the ground is the grand depository for seeds which are meant to be deposited in it, and again sought out of it. And therefore he confirms the passage afresh, by putting on it the impress (of his own inspired authority), saying, "For so it is written;" 1 Corinthians 15:45 that you may not suppose that the "being sown" means anything else than "you shall return to the ground, out of which you were taken;" nor that the phrase "for so it is written" refers to any other thing that the flesh.[On the Resurrection of the Flesh 52]

What I possess is flesh, not earth, even although of the flesh it is said: "Dust you are, and unto dust shall you return." In these words there is the mention of the origin, not a recalling of the substance. The privilege has been granted to the flesh to be nobler than its origin, and to have happiness aggrandized by the change wrought in it. [On the Resurrection of the Flesh 6]

Paul declares that it was said of the Son: "You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands." Whether therefore the Son made the heavens, as also the apostle would have it understood, while he himself certainly did not alone spread out the heavens without the Father; or as it stands in the book of Proverbs, "the Lord in wisdom has founded the earth, in understanding he has prepared the heavens," it is proved that neither the Father made the heavens alone without the Son, nor yet the Son without the Father.

Solomon says, "The Lord by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding he established the heavens." And this wisdom is the Word, and by him, as John says, "all things were made" [and without him not one thing was made]. This Word is Christ, "for there is one God the Father, from whom are all things. We are for him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we are through him." If all things are through him, he himself should not be reckoned with the "all things." Whoever dares to say that he, through whom are all things, is one of all the things surely will have the same speculation about God, from whom are all things. If anyone flees from this as absurd and excludes God from the "all things," it would follow that even the only-begotten Son, since he is proper to the Father's substance, must be excluded from the "all things." And if he is not one of the "all things," then it is not right to say about him "There was once when he was not" and "He was not before he was begotten." Such terms are fittingly used of creatures, but the Son himself is such a one as is the Father, of whose substance the Son is a proper offspring, Word and wisdom. This is peculiar to the Son in relation to the Father, and this shows that the Father is peculiar to the Son; so that we may neither say that God was ever wordless or that the Son was ever nonexistent. For how else could he be a Son, unless from God? Or how could he be Word and wisdom unless he is always peculiar to [God]?

The Lord founded the earth by wisdom, etc. God the Father through the Son created all things. Typically, however, He founded the earth by wisdom when He established the holy Church in the solidity of faith through Him; He stabilized the heavens with understanding when through the same He enlightened the sublime hearts of the preachers.

You will find it said in Proverbs, "God by wisdom founded the earth, and by prudence he prepared the heaven." Thus there is a certain prudence of God which one does not seek [except] in Christ Jesus. For all such [virtues], insofar as they are of God, are Christ: he is the wisdom of God, he is the power of God, he is the righteousness of God, he is sanctification, he is redemption. In this way he is the prudence of God. But though there is one substance, for differences in the aspects the names are many. You do not understand the same thing about Christ when you understand him as wisdom and when you understand him as righteousness. For when he is wisdom, you mean the knowledge of things divine and human, but when he is righteousness, he is that power which allots to every person according to worth. And when he is sanctification, he is what enables those faithful and dedicated to God to become holy. In this way also then you will understand him as prudence, when he is the knowledge of what is good and evil, and what is neither.

For in the beginning when He created the world and all that therein is, and when He was establishing things, wisdom worked with Him, even as Solomon saith, "The Lord by His wisdom laid the foundations of the earth, and He constructed the heavens by His understanding; and by His knowledge were the depths broken up, and the clouds distilled water." And again wisdom saith, "When He constructed the heaven I was with Him, and when He made a circle upon the face of the deep, and when He made firm the clouds from above, and when the fountains of the depths became strong." Now wisdom was with God in His primaeval works, but in this second creation faith is with Him; and in this second giving of birth He hath taken to Himself faith as a helpmeet. In everything faith cleaveth to God, and without it to-day He worketh no new things. It were an easy thing for Him to give thee birth from water and spirit without it, but until it is satisfied He doth not give thee new birth. He is able to make thee a new creature, and from being old to make thee new, but until He receiveth from thee faith as a pledge He neither changeth thee nor maketh thee a new creature.

By His wisdom the depths burst forth. When in the days of Noah all the fountains of the great abyss were broken up, or when through the daily course the fountains and rivers emanate from the abyss through the veins of the earth. Otherwise, by His wisdom the depths burst forth, when, by the grace of Christ granted, the profound mysteries of the heavens become known to the faithful.

And the clouds condense with dew. It is clear according to the letter, but allegorically the clouds are the teachers of the Church, elevated by contemplation and life, watering the hearts of listeners, like the land subjected to them by doctrine. Which condense with dew, because by the most subtle discernment they examine their virtues, which profit them, which lift them to high things, and which display examples to the lesser, and they examine them.

For in the beginning when He created the world and all that therein is, and when He was establishing things, wisdom worked with Him, even as Solomon saith, "The Lord by His wisdom laid the foundations of the earth, and He constructed the heavens by His understanding; and by His knowledge were the depths broken up, and the clouds distilled water." And again wisdom saith, "When He constructed the heaven I was with Him, and when He made a circle upon the face of the deep, and when He made firm the clouds from above, and when the fountains of the depths became strong." Now wisdom was with God in His primaeval works, but in this second creation faith is with Him; and in this second giving of birth He hath taken to Himself faith as a helpmeet. In everything faith cleaveth to God, and without it to-day He worketh no new things. It were an easy thing for Him to give thee birth from water and spirit without it, but until it is satisfied He doth not give thee new birth. He is able to make thee a new creature, and from being old to make thee new, but until He receiveth from thee faith as a pledge He neither changeth thee nor maketh thee a new creature.

My son, do not let these depart from your eyes. Beware lest, wearied by temporal discipline, you lose the grace of wisdom, which is so great.

Observe law and counsel. The law of wisdom is, as it says, If you wish to enter into life, you shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, and the rest (Mark 10). The counsel of wisdom is when it immediately adds: If you wish to be perfect, go, sell all that you have, etc. (Ibid.).

The first counsel is regulated according to the dictate of divinely instituted laws. Whence in Proverbs: 'Keep the law and counsel, and you will have grace for your mouth and life for your soul.' What is this law? Surely the law written outwardly and the law divinely inspired.

And it will be life to your soul. Your soul has life with God if you keep His decrees, however much the flesh may be pressed by the discipline of correction or even death.

And grace to your throat. How sweet are your words to my throat, says the psalm (Psalm 118)! The senses of the soul, therefore, have their throat, by which they judge the words they hear, by which they scrutinize the deeds of each person they see, and by which they receive these by embracing them, and reject those by despising them. When we keep the law and counsel of the Lord with these throats, grace is multiplied, because the more diligently one obeys the divine commands, the more sweetly he conceives His love. The Psalmist desired that this grace be in our throats when he said: Taste and see that the Lord is sweet (Psalm 34).

Then you will walk confidently in your way. We walk confidently in our way when, trusting in the grace of God, we undertake progress in our good conversation. Therefore, if we humbly submit to His commands, and taste the sweetness of heavenly love with the palate of our mind, we will always obtain an increase in good works. Moreover, with His help, we are defended in temptations so that we do not falter. For this is what follows: "And your foot will not stumble. For all things work together for good to those who love God."

Before the Lord's coming, philosophy was an essential guide to righteousness for the Greeks. At the present time, it is a useful guide toward reverence for God. It is a kind of preliminary education for those who are trying to gather faith through demonstration. "Your foot will not stumble," says Scripture, if you attribute good things, whether Greek or Christian, to Providence. God is responsible for all good things: of some directly, like the blessings of the Old and New Covenants, of others indirectly, like the riches of philosophy. Perhaps philosophy too was a direct gift of God to the Greeks before the Lord extended his appeal to the Greeks. For philosophy was to the Greek world what the Law was to the Hebrews, a tutor escorting them to Christ. So philosophy is a preparatory process; it opens the road for the person whom Christ brings to his final goal.

"If you lie down, you will not be afraid," etc. It is clear according to the letter, since he who remembers to live innocently and justly before God, sleeps securely, wakes securely, rests and walks securely. But also, when the just man sleeps in death, he not only does not fear the powers of evil spirits, but also rests in peace and safely awaits the day of resurrection, because he has God everywhere as his protector and keeper. This is like in the Psalm: "Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me" (Psalm 22).

If you believe that God makes provision for you, why be anxious and concerned about temporal affairs and the needs of your flesh? But if you do not believe that God makes provision for you, and for this reason you take pains to provide for your need separately from Him, then you are the most wretched of all men. Why even be alive or go on living in such a case? "Cast thy care upon the Lord, and He will nourish thee," and you shall never be dismayed at any terror that overtakes you.A man who has dedicated himself once and for all to God goes through life with a restful mind. Without non-possessiveness the soul cannot be freed from the turmoil of thoughts; and without stillness of the senses she will not perceive peace of mind. Without entering into temptations, no man will ever gain the wisdom of the Spirit; and without assiduous reading, he will know no refinement of thoughts. Without tranquility of thoughts the intellect will not be moved in hidden mysteries; and without the confidence that comes through faith, the soul cannot dare to withstand temptations with boldness. Moreover, without actual experience of God's protection, the heart cannot hope in Him; and if the soul does not taste Christ's sufferings consciously, she will never have communion with Him.

"Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due," etc. Because above he diligently urged the observance of the law of the Lord and his counsel, and promised eternal rest to those who observe it, now he repeatedly explains in various ways what should be observed. First, returning to what he had previously mentioned, he teaches that mercy should be shown to one's neighbor, and that one should live justly with him; then, he warns that one should be cautious of the enemy. Thus he says, "Do not withhold good from those who deserve it; if you can, do good yourself. Do not hear from the Lord with the Pharisees, 'You have not entered, and you hindered those who were entering' (Luke 11).

"Do not say to your neighbor, 'Go, and come back,' etc. This command is given not only about someone asking for alms but that we should be willing and ready to give generously and promptly. Likewise, all the commands of Christ, who said: 'You are my friends if you do what I command you,' we are ordered to do immediately and not defer until tomorrow.

"Do not contend with a person for no reason," etc. He does not forbid contending with the one who does wrong in order to correct him, because that is not done without purpose, but out of certain necessity which compels it to be done. Indeed, he who said: "If your brother sins, rebuke him" (Luke 17), wants us to try to recall the erring one to the path of truth as much as we can.

"For the Lord detests the perverse man." The Lord detests every mocker. Indeed, every mocker, because a mocker either despises carrying out the words of God which he knows, or distorts them by understanding and teaching them perversely. A mocker is also one who despises His promises as small, and scorns His threatening as bearable: just as he who insultingly mocks the simplicity or poverty of others. Consequently, divine justice rightly detests such a mocker. It is well added: "And he is intimate with the upright." For often the proud, while mocking the simple, judge themselves to be more prudent than those they mock. But their prudence, as James says, is earthly, unspiritual, demonic (James 3). The Lord, however, is intimate with the upright, because He illuminates them with the secrets of heavenly wisdom, which He considers those free from earthly pride and possessing simplicity. Hence, He says, "You have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children" (Matthew 11; Luke 10).

"The curse of the Lord is on the house of the wicked," etc. According to the example of the rich man clothed in purple, who in this life lacked spiritual goods, and in the future came to such poverty that he sought a drop of water from the finger of the once poor Lazarus and did not deserve to receive it (Luke 16).

"The tents of the righteous will be blessed." As the apostle says to the faithful, speaking of God: "Who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" (Ephesians 1). And they are to hear in reward from Him, "Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom" (Matthew 25). According to the letter, it often happens that those who for a long time prey on the property of others are finally consumed by poverty. But those who give their own generously often abound even in earthly goods.

The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away. Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble. [Proverbs 3:34] Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you. Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world. But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you. To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

We add, in the next place, that neither is every one that prophesies holy, nor every one that casts out devils religious: for even Balaam the son of Beor the prophet did prophesy, though he was himself ungodly; as also did Caiaphas, the falsely-named high priest. Nay, the devil foretells many things, and the demons, about Him; and yet for all that, there is not a spark of piety in them: for they are oppressed with ignorance, by reason of their voluntary wickedness. It is manifest, therefore, that the ungodly, although they prophesy, do not by their prophesying cover their own impiety; nor will those who cast out demons be sanctified by the demons being made subject to them: for they only mock one another, as they do who play childish tricks for mirth, and destroy those who give heed to them. For neither is a wicked king any longer a king, but a tyrant; nor is a bishop oppressed with ignorance or an evil disposition a bishop, but falsely so called, being not one sent out by God, but by men, as Ananiah and Samoeah in Jerusalem, and Zedekiah and Achiah the false prophets in Babylon. And indeed Balaam the prophet, when he had corrupted Israel by Baalpeor, suffered punishment; and Caiaphas at last was his own murderer; and the sons of Sceva, endeavouring to cast out demons, were wounded by them, and fled away in an unseemly manner; and the kings of Israel and of Judah, when they became impious, suffered all sorts of punishments. It is therefore evident how bishops and presbyters, also falsely so called, will not escape the judgment of God. For it will be said to them even now: "O ye priests that despise my name, I will deliver you up to the slaughter, as I did Zedekiah and Achiah, whom the king of Babylon fried in a frying-pan," as says Jeremiah the prophet. We say these things, not in contempt of true prophecies, for we know that they are wrought in holy men by the inspiration of God, but to put a stop to the boldness of vainglorious men; and add this withal, that from such as these God takes away His grace: for "God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble."

There is hardly a page in the holy books in which it is not shown that God resists the proud but to the humble offers grace.

The Lord gives greater grace than does the friendship of the world, because this grants earthly goods for a time and things that are to be lost with sorrow; he bestows the eternal joy of life. On what sort he bestows this grace, however, he explains in succession. Wherefore he says, "God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble." God indeed punishes thieves, perjurers, dissolute persons, and other sinners, as despisers of his commandments. But he is said particularly to resist the proud, because they certainly are punished with a greater penalty who trust in their own strength, who neglect to be made subject to divine power by repenting, who refuse to seek the help of grace from above, as if they are sufficient by themselves to achieve salvation. But, on the other hand, he gives grace to the humble, because they who in the midst of the wounds of their vices humbly put themselves in the hands of the true physician rightly receive the gift of the hoped-for cure.… He will give grace, however, to the meek, because he bestows both the perfection of their good work and the gifts of a blessed everlasting life on those who humbly follow him.

"He mocks proud mockers, etc." The Apostle James and Peter, following the ancient translation, wrote these verses, saying: "God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble" (James 4; 1 Peter 5).

Since, then, we are a holy portion, we should do everything that makes for holiness. We should flee from slandering, vile and impure embraces, drunkenness, rioting, filthy lusts, detestable adultery and disgusting arrogance. "For God," says Scripture, "resists the arrogant but gives grace to the humble." We should attach ourselves to those to whom God's grace has been given. We should clothe ourselves with concord, being humble, self-controlled, far removed from all gossiping and slandering, and justified by our deeds, not by words.

Let no man deceive himself: if any one be not within the altar, he is deprived of the bread of God. For if the prayer of one or two possesses such power, how much more that of the bishop and the whole Church! He, therefore, that does not assemble with the Church, has even by this manifested his pride, and condemned himself. For it is written, "God resisteth the proud." Let us be careful, then, not to set ourselves in opposition to the bishop, in order that we may be subject to God.

From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. [Proverbs 3:34] Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

Candidly, I say to you, God hates all sin without exception: lying, perjury, theft, robbery, adultery, fornication; and if anyone should be caught in any of these acts, he would not be able to raise his eyes, and we would look upon him as one accursed. Yet, the proud man commits a far worse sin than adultery, and still we continue to converse with him. The fornicator may say, My flesh overcame me; youth was too much for me. I am not advocating that you yield to such a sin, for God hates that as well as any other; but, in comparing evils, I maintain that whatever other wrong a man may commit, theft, for example, he can always find an excuse for it. What excuse does he give? I committed the theft because I was in need, I was dying from hunger, I was sick. What can the proud man say? Realize how evil pride is from the very fact that there is no excuse for it. Other vices harm only those who commit them; pride inflicts far more injury upon everyone. I am saying all this lest you consider pride a trifling sin. What, in fact, does the apostle say? "Lest he incur the condemnation passed on the devil." The one who is puffed up with his own importance falls into the judgment of the devil. On the strength of Holy Writ, therefore, I declare, "When God is dealing with the arrogant he is stern, but to the humble, he shows kindness," so that we may shun all sin, most of all pride.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Chapter 3, Verse 1) For behold, the Lord God of hosts will take away from Jerusalem and from Judah the mighty and strong: all the strength of bread and all the strength of water. Thus far, they think it speaks of judgment. What follows speaks of the coming captivity; some interpret it as referring to the Babylonians, others to the Romans. But it is better, as we have said before, to refer all things to the Lord's passion. For after his death, all grace and gifts were taken away from the Jews, according to what is written in the Gospel: The law and the prophets were until John the Baptist (Matthew 11:13). And there is an order: Because you refused to stop from the man, whose spirit is in his nostrils, who is considered high: but on the contrary, you shed the blood of the righteous, and you devised the worst plan, saying: Let us bind the just, for he is useless to us (Wisdom II, 12); therefore you shall eat the fruit of your inventions. There is nothing strong among the Jews after the Passion of the Lord, nothing powerful: but everything is weak and feeble. And no one can say among them: I can do all things in him who strengthens me (Philippians IV, 13), Christ Jesus our Lord. And because we read 'strong' and 'strong woman' according to the Septuagint; we can apply it to the strong man: Until we all meet the perfect man, in the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ (Ephesians 4:13). Furthermore, strong women: I want, he says, all of you to present yourself as a chaste virgin to Christ (2 Corinthians 11:2). But strength is also found in bread, and strength in water, as food and drink are received. We read that Moses was on Mount Sinai for forty days, and did not eat bread or drink water (Exodus 34). Also to be heard is what is said to Adam: In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread until you return to the ground from which you were taken (Gen. III, 19). Likewise, what is said by the Savior: Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God (Matth. IV, 4). Therefore, the strength of bread will be taken away from them: he who says: I am the living bread, which came down from heaven (John VI, 51). And the power of water, of which the same Lord spoke: Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again. But whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never thirst again. But the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life (John 4:13). We read about such bread in Proverbs: Open your eyes and be filled with bread (Proverbs 20:13). The Jews have bread, but without strength; they have water, but without power. For they read the Scriptures, but do not understand. They hold on to the pages, and they have lost Christ, who is written in the pages (1 Corinthians 3). They are nourished with milk, like infants, and not with solid food. And because they have lost strength and are weak, they eat vegetables. But the solid food of athletes sustains human life and provides strength to the living (Romans 14). Concerning this bread and water, which are taken away from the Jews, another Prophet also testifies, saying: 'Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will send a famine on the land: not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord' (Amos 8:11).

Consider whether what follows in the prophet has not received its fulfillment: "The Lord of hosts has taken away from Judah and from Jerusalem, among other things, both the prophet and the wise craftsman"; that is, his Holy Spirit, who builds the church, which is indeed the temple, and household and city of God.… And so in this manner the law and the prophets were until John, but the dews of divine grace were withdrawn from the nation.

97. For behold the sovereign. Here begins the second part, in which he denounces their sin as to the oppression of neighbors. And it is divided into two parts:

in the first is the confutation of the oppressors;

in the second, the consolation of the oppressed: and in that day seven women shall take hold of one man (ch. 4).

And because violent dominion is not only the fault of man, but also is the punishment of God judging the sins of the people, as it says in Job 34:30: who makes a man that is a hypocrite to reign for the sins of the people? Therefore the first part is divided into two parts:

for in the first, it is predicted as far as it is a punishment inflicted by God;

in the second, it is denounced as far as it is a fault committed by man, where it says, O my people (Isa 3:12).

The first of these is divided into two:

in the first, the overthrow of the government is threatened;

in the second, he assigns the reason, where it says, for Jerusalem is ruined (Isa 3:8).

The first of these is divided into three:

in the first, he takes away men suitable for the office of government;

in the second, unworthy men are set over them, where it says, and I will give children to be their princes (Isa 3:4);

in the third, those who are called are refused, where it says, a man shall take hold of his brother (Isa 3:6).

The first of these is divided into two:

in the first, he takes away the man suitable for the office of government;

in the second, he takes away the man who is useful for the help of the ruler, where it says, and the counselor (Isa 3:3).

The first of these is divided into three, according to three things which are required for the suitability of superiors:

for first, he takes away the man who is suitable as to power;

in the second, as to sagacity, where it says, the judge (Isa 3:2);

in the third part, as to authority, where it says, the ancient (Isa 3:2).

98. Power is required in a leader or king for directing the wars of the people and for restraining insolence: seek not to be made a judge, unless you have strength enough to extirpate iniquities (Sir 7:6).

This power consists in three things, according to which the first part is divided into three parts, namely, in strength of body, which consists in three things, namely, in vigor of constitution, and as to this, he says: I warn you to cease, for, that is, because, behold, it is near, he shall take away the valiant, that is, he who is strong in health of constitution; in strength of limbs, and thus, he says, the strong, because strength consists in bones and sinews, as the Philosopher says. Again, in plenty of food, and thus he says, the whole strength of bread, in which all food and drink is signified: the chief thing for man's life is water and bread, and clothing (Sir 29:28[21]).

(Verse 2.) A strong and warrior man, judge and Prophet, and sorcerer, and elder. For the strong, which is only in Hebrew, both the Seventy translated as giant and strong, wanting the same person to be both giant and strong. About the strong it has been said above. But about the giant in a good sense, that is, about the Lord Savior, we read in the eighteenth psalm: He rejoiced as a giant to run his way: his going out is from the highest heaven, and his circuit reaches to the highest of it (Psalm XVIII, 8). But if we read, (Gen. X), we understand that Nimrod, who was a hunter before the Lord, was a giant and the giants (Gen. VI), for whom the flood came upon the earth, are to be understood in the opposite sense. Likewise, we understand the warrior man in the following story, that they were captured and continue to serve until this day, and have not thrown off the yoke of servitude. But they do not even have their own judges, and are subject to Roman judges, so much so that Roman princes judge their own princes who seem to be among the people. But we must also say this, that there is no warrior among them in the law, having the knowledge of judging: but all things are vain and fleeting, and full of foolishness. But concerning the Prophet, that he has ceased to exist among them, there is no doubt. We seek according to the Hebrew, how we should interpret the soothsayer, whom all have interpreted as divine: except for the seventy, who translated it as conjecture. And it must be said that often even through soothsayers future events are predicted, as we read in Balaam's divine oracle, and in the oracles of the five cities of Palestine, Gaza and Ascalon, Gath, and Ekron, and Ashdod, who give advice on how the ark of the Lord should be returned (1 Sam. 6). And the sense is: Both the true and the false will be taken away by the Jews. The elder, also known as the Seventy, understands that he was taken away by the Jews, who knew that elders are chosen based on merit and wisdom, not age, in the holy scriptures. For among the Jews, the elderly have not ceased to exist, as we often see them reaching advanced old age. And according to Theodotion, we read about two elderly presbyters in the beginning of Daniel (Dan. XIII), who endured the hardships of many days. For even Moses is commanded to choose elders whom he knows to be elders (Exod. XVIII). And the apostle Paul, in writing to Timothy, fully explains what kind of elder should be chosen (I Tim. V). Hence it is said in Proverbs: The glory of elders is their gray hair (Prov. XX, 29). What is this gray hair? Without a doubt, it is wisdom, of which it is written: The gray hair of men is their understanding (Sap. IV, 8). And while we read that men lived for nine hundred years and even more, from Adam to Abraham (Genes. XXIV), no one else is called an elder, that is, an old man, before Abraham, who is shown to have lived for far fewer years. And John also writes to children and young men, and even to the elderly, saying, I have written to you, fathers, because you have known him who is from the beginning (1 John 2:13). And Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, lost his kingdom because he did not want to listen to the elders (1 Kings 12).

Second, power consists in constancy of heart, and thus he says, the strong man, as far as it comes from the strength which is a power of the soul.

Third, it consists in the exercise of the art of war, and thus he says, the man of war.

99. Wisdom is required for the exercise of judgment: because of which Solomon asked for wisdom from God: give therefore to your servant an understanding heart . . . to discern between good and evil (1 Kgs 3:9).

And this may be had in three ways: either by human institution; and as to this he says, the judge, as it were, the expert in the law; or by divine inspiration, and as to this he says, the prophet; or by the revelation of a demon, and as to this he says, the diviner, because they divined on the altars of demons, and they sometimes spoke truths.

100. Authority is necessary for reverence, and this also consists in three things:

in dignity of office, and as to this he says, the prince; and by these he understands all other princes, as the Gloss says;

in uprightness of morals: the ancient in morals;

in maturity of countenance: the honorable in countenance.

Concerning this chapter, we first consider where it says, the diviner (Isa 3:2).

According to this it seems that it may be lawful to inquire into future things by diviners: for taking away something unlawful is not a punishment, but rather a benefit.

Moreover, the same thing seems to follow from the Gloss, which says diviners sometimes speak truths; but truth is to be received from wherever it comes, therefore it should also be received from diviners.

Moreover, since demons are clearest mirrors according to intellect, as Dionysius says, it seems that, at least in things that pertain to knowledge, it may not be evil to receive from them, and it will be lawful to turn thus to divination, and especially since no knowledge is evil, and divination may relate knowledge.

129. To this is to be said that divination, by its name, signifies a usurpation of a divine act, and this especially in the knowledge of future things which cannot be known naturally.

For there are certain future things which have determinate causes in nature, from which they arise necessarily, like an eclipse of the sun; and divination does not concern these things.

Other things also have determinate causes, from which they arise, as in many things, like drought in the dog days of summer; hence, divination does not concern these things (for such are the prognoses of doctors concerning health or death, and of mariners concerning a coming storm), unless perhaps they are foretold as if coming in immovable truth, for this belongs only to God.

There are also certain future things which do not have determinate causes in nature, and especially those which come to be from free will; and of these causes no one has foreknowledge except God, to whom all things are present because of the stability of his eternity, or someone who learns them from God. And if indeed such things are predicted by divine inspiration, it is prophecy, not divination; if, however, someone predicts by his own devising, deceptively, for the sake of some profit, as little old women do, it is called divination; and it is a sin, because it is a lie, since they assert uncertainties as true, and because it is deception, and because it is a usurpation of divinity.

130. Similarly, a prediction is called divination if it comes to be in any way whatsoever from the counsel of demons, who indeed are able to predict some future things, either because they themselves are the causes of them, or because they themselves know them through the revelation of good angels, or because they foreknow by natural knowledge in those things which have determinate causes in nature that are hidden from us and known to them because of the perspicacity of their intelligence and because of their long experience.

And nevertheless it is always a sin to inquire from them, and apostasy from faith, as Augustine says. And this is so for three reasons: first, because, although they may speak truths, nevertheless their intention is always to deceive; second, because they are not able to have certain knowledge, except of those things which they know through revelation; third, because we are not able to be at the same time sharers in the gifts of God and of the devil; and among all these, this last reason is foremost. And although it may be a benefit simply, nevertheless it is a punishment to those who follow such things, because it is contrary to their will.

(Verse 3.) The leader is in charge of fifty. Συνεκδοχικῶς means 'comparatively-speaking' or 'in relation to the whole'. Just as centurions are called who are in charge of a hundred soldiers, and chiliarchs who are in charge of a thousand, whom we call tribunes because they preside over a tribe, so in the Israelite army there were quinquagenarii who were in charge of fifty soldiers. Hence we also call them decanos, who are in charge of ten men. It is not surprising if all the dignity of soldiers is lost among the Jews, since they do not have the power to fight with a sword and carry weapons. But because the number fifty always refers to penance: and the prince of penance, and the head of those who are saved by penance, is Christ: let us briefly explain the mysteries of this number. In Genesis we read, when Abraham spoke to the Lord, that if fifty righteous people are found in a city, the city will be saved. And in Numbers, there are seven weeks, that is, the most famous feast of Pentecost. The Jubilee, which is the year of remission, is woven in cycles of seven weeks, which is forty-nine years, during which trumpets sound and all ancient possessions are restored. This contains the sacrament. Therefore, David writes the fiftieth Psalm about repentance. We also read in the same book of Numbers that when it comes to the spoils and plunder, the fiftieth (or perhaps five hundredth) chapter states that both priests and Levites receive a portion of the spoils, both from the people and from the animals, and the fiftieth chapter states that the Levites, who guard the doors of the tabernacle, also receive a portion. The parable of the two debtors, one who owed five hundred denarii and the other fifty, is also related to this. And so the Apostle, among the Ephesians to whom he had explained all the mysteries, desires to remain until Pentecost, until they are completely converted to the Lord, saying: For there is a great and effective door opened to me, and there are many adversaries. However, the devil also imitates the Israelite army, of which Jethro gave his advice to Moses, to appoint leaders and officers over the people (Exodus 18). Hence, the wicked king (2 Kings 1) sent two officers with very obedient soldiers to capture Elijah, who were consumed by divine fire. But the third officer was saved, who, having turned to prayer, had come to know the sacraments of repentance. And the Jews, unwilling for Him to be the perfect Lord and the fifty-year-old prince, said to Him: You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham? (John 8:57) And He, knowing that He is not only the Prince of the repentant, but also of the righteous, answered: Before Abraham was, I am. (Ibid., 58). And that the Lord is the Fifty-Year-Old Prince, we can understand from one feast, about which He says: The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath. (Matthew 12:8). But if it is the Sabbath, and the Kalends. If the Kalends, and the Pascha, that is, the unleavened bread. If the Pascha, and the Jubilee. If the Jubilee, and the Tabernacles. If the Tabernacles, and the Pentecost, which is related to the fiftieth number.

And with an honorable appearance, both as an advisor. They chose one admirable advisor for two reasons, that is, an honorable appearance and an advisor. Among other things, the Lord will also remove this from Judea, so that they have no advisor: but they do everything without advice. And the Greek poets have that praiseworthy and admirable saying: 'First, it is blessed to be able to reason for oneself; second, it is blessed to listen to the wise.' But whoever lacks both, he is useless, both to himself and to all. Hence we also read this in our books: Let there be many friends for you, but let there be only one counselor among a thousand (Eccl. VI, 6). And again: Do everything with counsel (Prov. XIII, 10): and it will give you admirable prudence, a counselor. Also, the decrees of the Senate are called, and the former Roman leaders were called consuls, either from advising the citizens or from governing everything with counsel. And we have in the Church our senate, the assembly of the elders. So if, among other things, Judaea has also lost its elders, how can it have the council, which belongs specifically to the elders?

And a wise architect. For whom the Eagle transferred the most wise of craftsmen, to show that they had many craftsmen once: such as that one was Bezalel, son of Uri, son of Hur from the tribe of Judah, whom God filled with the spirit of wisdom, and understanding, and knowledge, so that he would be the most perfect craftsman in every work, not only in gold and silver, but also in bronze and other things that Moses enumerates, who built the Tabernacle of God (Exod. 31). Therefore, with those architects perishing, all desire for building was transferred to the Church. Hence the apostle Paul says: Like a wise architect, I laid the foundation (1 Corinthians 3:10). And Jeremiah was also an architect, who not only uprooted, dug out, and destroyed, but also built (Jeremiah 18). Therefore, the same apostle speaks: We are God's farming, God's building (1 Corinthians 3:9). Our Lord is also called the builder of walls (Ephesians 2). And in the Gospel the son of a carpenter is mentioned, who created all things (Matthew 13). In the book of Kings, we also read that King Solomon sent and brought Hiram of Tyre, the son of a widow, who was from the tribe of Naphtali and had a Tyrian father, a craftsman in bronze. And he went to the king and performed all the works for King Solomon: in which is a type of building the Church, which is not only generated from the tribe of Judah, but also from Naphtali, and has a Tyrian father, who had a widowed mother; because she had lost her previous husband (1 Kings 7). And many more are the sons of the desolate one, more than she who has a husband (Isaiah 54). But also in the book of Chronicles we read about the valley of craftsmen: Saraias begot Joab, the father of the valley of craftsmen; for there were craftsmen there (1 Chronicles 4:14). They are said to dwell in the valley because knowledge did not puff them up, but they followed Jesus in humility and meekness, being able to say with the Apostle: For I am the least of the Apostles, who am not worthy to be called an Apostle (1 Corinthians 15:9). And elsewhere: In part we know, and in part we prophesy, and now we see through a glass darkly (I Cor. XIII, 9).

And the wise speaker of mystical speech. For which the Seventy have interpreted as a wise listener; Theodotion, a wise enchanter; Aquila, a wise whisperer; Symmachus, the wise speaker of mystical speech, whom we also followed in this place. It must be said first according to the Seventy; that among other spiritual gifts, a wise listener is also necessary in the Church. For to others is given prophecy: to others discernment of spirits (I Cor. XII, 10). And so, there were established among the people of the Jews certain priestly ranks to discern between prophets and false prophets: that is, to understand who spoke by the spirit of God and who spoke by the contrary spirit. Let us read Jeremiah. But this man, skilled in mystical language (Jeremiah 14), or as Theodotion preferred, an enchanter, seems to me to be learned and well-versed both in the Law and the Prophets, as well as in the Gospel and the Apostles, who can heal each disturbance of the soul with his teaching and restore it to a state of peace: so that the fornicator may receive chastity, the glutton may receive frugality, and the once greedy may give alms. He condemned all the synagogues of the Jews, and he will not be able to find a teacher who teaches sacredness, and who, having despised wealth, teaches that poverty must be followed. Concerning such sorcerers against serpents and asps, that is, against sinners who have forsaken the justice of God, David spoke in the Psalm: Sinners have been estranged from the womb: they have erred from their birth, they have spoken false things. Their fury is according to the likeness of a serpent: like the adder that stops her ears. Which will not hear the voice of the charmers; nor of the enchanter charming wisely (Psalm 67:4-5). Every word of the Apostle against serpents and asps is an incantation, which sinners and heretics do not hear, because they close their ears, so that they may not hear the truth.

101. Some princes are useful for the government of the people, or for dealing with doubtful affairs, and as to this he says, and the counsellor; or for constructing buildings: the architect, which comes from archos, which means "prince," and techne, which means "art," especially mechanical art. The architect is said to be the principal artist, who directs the other artists to introduce the form and prepare the matter, according to the consideration of the end, which he has knowledge of in use or reason.

102. But wisdom, according to the Philosopher, is said to be twofold: namely, universal and particular.

In defining particular wisdom, he says that it is the virtue through which man is placed in the utmost of any art, such as medicine, and that doctor is called wise who is most certain in things that pertain to medicine; and a builder is called wise similarly, and thus for others. And it is in this way that it is understood here.

Universal wisdom is that which is the utmost in all arts and sciences, and it is by this that man is raised to knowledge of the noblest things, that is, of separated, or spiritual, substances; and this, according to the Philosopher, is metaphysics, and, according to us, is theology.

103. Third, someone is necessary for teaching divine things, and as to this, he says: and the skillful in mystical speech; "mystical" comes from mystim, which means "secret," that is, pertaining to divine words which are secret. And concerning all these things it is stated in 2 Kings 24:15 that they were carried away by Nebuchadnezzar into Babylon: and he carried away Joachin into Babylon, and the king's mother, and the king's wives, and his eunuchs: and the judges of the land he carried into captivity.

(Verse 4.) And I will give their children as princes. If this is said in the person of the Prophet: Behold, for the Lord God of hosts will take away from Jerusalem and from Judah the strong and the mighty: all the strength of bread, and all the strength of water, and the rest: how does the same prophet now speak: I will give their children as princes, and the effeminate shall rule over them? Therefore, according to the prophetic custom, while the Prophet is speaking, suddenly God speaks through the Prophet in his own person, and says: I will give their children as princes: for by taking away those things which I had given before, and by taking away as it were good things in my anger, now on the contrary I will give evil things. He was a soldier, both admirable and wise, a skilled architect and a discerning listener, etc. For these reasons, I will give birth to princes. Those who have lost a priest, whom the previous sermon revealed, just like Abraham who was first called a priest, rightly receive young princes (Genesis VII). Concerning these, we also read in Ecclesiastes: Woe to you, city, whose king is young, and whose princes eat in the morning. Blessed is the land whose king is the son of ingenuous ones (Eccles. X, 16). Such was the young king Rehoboam, son of Solomon, who followed the advice of the young men (3 Kings XII). Not because he was young in age, but in wisdom. Otherwise, it is said that he received a kingdom of forty years or more. On the other hand, Solomon was twelve years old when he assumed power, and because he had wisdom, he was called young. For there was in him a breadth of heart, and a vastness of wisdom as great as the sand on the shores of the sea. Hence the Apostle writes to Timothy, Let no one despise your youth (I Tim. IV, 12). For whoever is young in age, is old in maturity. And Daniel, according to Theodotion, before he became a judge, was called a boy (Dan. XIII). But after God stirred his spirit and he judged the elders, he received the dignity of the presbytery. Jeremiah, who had said to the Lord, 'You are my master, O Lord,' the Lord replied, 'Do not say, "I am only a youth"; for to all whom I send you, you shall go, and whatever I command you, you shall speak. Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you to deliver you, says the Lord.' (Jeremiah 1:6-8) For this reason, I believe that young widows should marry, bear children, and manage their households, so as to give the opponent no occasion for slander. (1 Timothy 5) And when they have become self-indulgent in Christ, they want to marry, thus incurring condemnation, because they have set aside their first faith. And a widow is not supported by the Church's provisions unless she is sixty years old and has both the maturity of character and age. Someone may think that what the Apostle prohibits (1 Timothy 3), that a bishop should not be a neophyte, pertains to this, because he is a little one in faith, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the judgment of the devil. But the judgment of the devil is nothing else but pride, because of which he fell from heavenly things. Hence the Savior speaks, 'I saw Satan, like lightning falling from heaven' (Luke 10:18).

And they will be ruled by effeminate men. Concerning this, it is written in Hebrew, 'Thalulim' (which the Septuagint and Theodotion interpret as mockers), Aquila translates as those who change and practice sexual immorality. Such as we read in the Book of Judges about the Levite's concubine in Gibeah (Judges 19). Let us consider the Patriarchs of the Jews, and we will see that the prophecy is fulfilled with young men or boys who are effeminate and indulge in luxuries. We can call them deceivers and teachers of the people of Israel, who devour the people of God like bread, and interpret the holy Scriptures perversely, and they mock the foolishness of the disciples.

104. And I will give children. Here he shows the subversion of the government as to unworthy men being placed over them. And this is divided into two parts:

in the first is placed the authority of unworthy men;

in the second, the consequent disturbance of the people, where it says, and the people shall fall one upon another (Isa 3:5).

Now, they are unworthy as to lack of wisdom and of age, and thus he says I will give children to be their princes; and as to lack of virtue, and thus he says: and the effeminate shall rule over them, that is, the lustful and the weak: I will give you kings in my wrath (Hos 13:11).

(Verse 5.) And the people will fall, man against man, each one against his neighbor: the young will rise up against the old, and the lowly against the noble. When the young become leaders and mockers of the Lord, as the prophetic word describes, then no order of dignity, age, or knowledge will be preserved; but the young will rebel against the elderly, and the lowly against the noble, and they will fall together. And that Apostolic saying will be fulfilled: biting each other, you have been consumed by each other (Galatians 5:15). Josephus writes in Book 5 of The Jewish War that these events happened to the people of Judaea under Titus, son of Vespasian: that when they were being besieged by the Romans, there was a division of the city into three parts due to the rebellion. Some held the citadel and the Temple, others held the lower part of the city, and others held the upper part.

105. The effect of the government in the disturbance of the people is touched on in three ways.

First, universal dissension, hence he says: the people shall fall, from the unity of peace through which they are a people, one to another, that is, one against another: where there is no governor, the people shall fall (Prov 11:14); they were led away as a flock: they shall be afflicted, because they have no shepherd (Zech 10:2).

Second, dissolution of friendship: every man to his neighbor, that is, against his neighbor: every brother will utterly supplant, and every friend will walk deceitfully (Jer 9:4).

Third, confusion of rank: the child shall make a tumult against the ancient, and the base against the honorable: they respected not the persons of the priests, neither had they pity on the ancient (Lam 4:16).

(Verse 6) For a man shall seize his brother, the kinsman of his father. The garment is yours, be our prince; but this ruin is under your control. Regarding ruin, Symmachus and Theodotio transferred infirmity, 70 food items. But it signifies a scarcity of people, and the most serious shortage of all, so that whoever has food and clothing is considered powerful, wealthy, and famous. And when he says according to the Hebrew: But this ruin is under your control, it has this meaning: Our misery and calamity will be sustained and protected by your assistance. And it must be considered that individuals should choose their own leaders, and there may be conflict in the election of leaders, as some consider others worthy of leadership. And they do not say to them, your possessions, and wealth, and income will sustain us, but this weakness, or my food, will be healed by your support and will depend on your decision.

106. Shall take hold. Here he shows the subversion of the government as to the refusal of office of those invited to rule, as if it were something ruinous. And this is divided into two parts:

in the first, the invitation of the electors is set out;

in the second, the refusal of the one elected, where it says, and in that day he shall answer (Isa 3:7).

Concerning the first, three things are set out, namely, the election itself, the occasion of the election, and the charge of office.

The election is irregular, because it is by only one; hence he says, there will be a tumult, for, that is, because, they did not elect in common; but a man shall take hold of his brother, that is, one joined by blood, one of the house of his father, that is, one accepted in familiarity, even though he is base: he that builds up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity (Mic 3:10). And this is against the form observed in Numbers 1 in the election of princes done by the precept of the Lord, the authority of the superior, and the consent of the multitude.

But the occasion is base, because it is on account of riches; hence he says: you have a garment, for he hopes for temporal assistance; and this is against the form handed on in Exodus 18:21–22: and provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, in whom there is truth, and that hate avarice, and appoint of them rulers of thousands, and of hundreds . . . who may judge the people at all times.

But the charge is dangerous; hence he says: be you our ruler, and let this ruin, that is, danger, be under your hand, that is, under your keeping and defense. Keep this man: and if he shall slip away, your life shall be for his life (1 Kgs 20:39).

(Verse 7) And he shall answer in that day, saying, I am not a physician, and in my house there is no bread nor clothing; do not make me the ruler of the people. For physician, Symmachus and the Septuagint translated principem as Theodotio, ἐπιδεσμεύοντα, who binds wounds and provides for health. He shall answer, in Hebrew it is not found, but it is added from the Septuagint. In Hebrew, for it is joined with the things that are written above: In that day he shall say, I am not a physician, and so on. But he will say, who has been elected as leader. And just as the people who understand him, whom they consider wealthier than themselves, desire to have him as their ruler, so the one who is chosen, considering his poverty and weakness, declares himself unworthy of the bestowed honor, and unable to remedy the flaws, that is, to care for the sick, to provide food for the hungry, to clothe the naked, when he himself can barely sustain himself. Therefore, let us not immediately acquiesce to the judgement of the multitude, but let us know our own measure when elected to leadership, and let us humble ourselves under the powerful hand of God: because God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble (1 Peter 5). Those who have no bread and clothing, when they themselves are hungry and naked, and have no spiritual food, nor have preserved the complete tunic of Christ, promise others both food and clothing, and boast of being physicians when they are full of wounds; nor do they observe that commandment of Moses: Provide another whom you may send: and that other commandment: Seek not to be a judge, lest perhaps you may not be able to take away iniquities (Eccl. VII, 6). Only Jesus heals all weaknesses and infirmities, of whom it is written: Who heals the broken of heart, and binds up their bruises (Ps. CXLVI. 3).

107. He shall answer. Here the refusal of the one elected is set out.

And first, his reasonable excuse is shown;

second, his renunciation of office is concluded where it says, make me not ruler of the people.

In excuse, he brings forward three things, namely, his impotence to repel harmful things: I am no healer, namely, that I might heal your miseries: is there no balm in Galaad? Or is there no physician there? (Jer 8:22); to supply need: and in my house there is no bread, by which I might supply the need of your hunger: the little ones have asked for bread, and there was none to break it unto them (Lam 4:4); to foster or preserve what is necessary: nor clothing, by which heat is preserved: she shall not fear for her house in the cold of snow: for all her domestics are clothed with double garments (Prov 31:21).

108. Make me not ruler of the people. Here his renunciation of office is concluded, where a threefold reason is placed, namely, the impediment of devout contemplation: can I leave my fatness, which both gods and men make use of? (Judg 9:9); of sweet affection: can I leave my sweetness? (Judg 9:11); and of spiritual exultation: can I forsake my wine, that cheers God and men, and be promoted among the other trees? (Judg 9:13).

(Verses 8, 9.) For Jerusalem has fallen, and Judah has collapsed: because their tongue and their inventions are against the Lord, to provoke the eyes of His majesty. The recognition of their faces testifies against them, and they declare their sin like Sodom, and do not hide it. The Prophet speaks of this, not as many suppose, that he who was the chosen leader spoke. And he says that for this reason no one wants to rule over a sinful people, because both Judah and Jerusalem, and the city, and the province of Judaea, or the tribe of Judah have fallen together. And they gave reasons for their impiety, because they blasphemed against the Lord and said: 'Take him away, take him away, crucify him, for we have no king but Caesar' (John 19:15, 16): and with the fury of their tongue, they provoked the most merciful Lord to bitterness. The recognition of their faces will answer to them: that is, they have received their sins, or as the Septuagint translated: the confusion of their faces opposed them: that is, they always had their own sins before their eyes. And just as the Sodomites, sinning with all freedom and not having any shame in their wickedness, said to Lot: 'Bring out the men so that we may have relations with them' (Gen. XIX, 5); so too these, proclaiming openly, have preached their own sin and have had no shame in blaspheming. For the second plank after shipwreck is consolation in miseries, to hide their own impiety. Hence they are called the rulers of the Sodomites, because they had Sodomite sins.

109. For Jerusalem is ruined. Here he sets out the cause of this renunciation.

And first, he sets out the proximate cause, namely, the punishment of universal ruin; hence is said on the part of the prophet: therefore he will refuse, for, that is, because, Jerusalem is ruined, that is, the city itself, and Judah, the province itself, is fallen, from its integrity through punishment, below: they have led away the strong ones thereof into captivity, they have destroyed the houses thereof, they have brought it to ruin (Isa 23:13).

110. Second, he sets out the remote cause, namely, their fault. And this is divided into three parts:

in the first part, he adds to the weight of the fault,

in the second, he ordains the punishment for the fault, where it says, woe to their souls (Isa 3:9);

in the third, he shows the justice of the one who punishes, where it says, say to the just man (Isa 3:10).

He adds to the weight of their sin from three things:

from the species of their sin, because it is blasphemy against God; hence he says: therefore it is fallen because their tongue is against the Lord, below: upon whom have you jested? Upon whom have you opened your mouth wide, and put out your tongue? (Isa 57:4).

Second, from the novelty of their sin; hence he says: their devices are against the Lord: their own devices now have beset them about, they have been done before my face (Hos 7:2).

It is the tribes, then, that are meant by the names of the patriarchs. From the tribe of Simeon come the scribes, from that of Levi the chief priests, who brought their wickedness to completion and filled up the entire measure of their fathers' ungodliness in the passion of the Lord. They took counsel against the Lord Jesus, to kill him, even as Isaiah says, "Alas for their souls! Because they have devised an evil counsel against themselves, saying. 'Let us bind the just one, for he is profitless to us.' " They killed the prophets and apostles who announced the coming of the Lord of salvation and preached his glorious passion and resurrection. Thereafter, in their greed and out of their desire for earthly wickedness, they fled from sharing in the divine, from chastity of body and moderation of spirit, contempt for money and profit in grace.

Those who look upon their dispersion and the desolation of their city may not aptly say, "Woe to them, for they have imagined an evil imagination, saying against their own soul, let us bind the righteous man, because he is not pleasing to us." It is so true, for when they erred concerning the Scriptures, they did not know that "the one who digs a pit for his neighbor falls in it; and a serpent will bite the one who destroys a hedge."

They bound Jesus and led him to the meeting place of the high priest. Can you recognize that this was already written? Isaiah says, "Woe to their souls because they have taken evil counsel against themselves, saying, 'Let us bind the just one, for he is troublesome to us.' " Woe to their souls indeed! Let us see why. Isaiah was sawn in two, but afterwards the people were restored. Jeremiah was thrown into the dungeon, but the Jews had their wound healed. In these instances the sin was against a man, and therefore less. However, when they sinned not against a man but against God become human, then woe to their souls!

Immediately following, the prophet himself explains why he called them rulers of Sodom and people of Gomorrah: "Your hands are full of blood." Again a little later he says, "They have proclaimed their sin as Sodom and made it manifest. Woe to their souls, because they have taken evil counsel with themselves, saying, 'We will bind the just one, for he is a burden to us.' " Since he overtly speaks of blood and a plot against a just man, there is nothing else this could be than the plot against our Savior Jesus Christ.

Again, they are to be admonished that if they are not afraid of being wicked; they should at least be ashamed of being seen for what they are. Often a sin that is concealed is avoided, because a mind that is ashamed to be taken for what it does not fear to be in fact is sometimes ashamed to be in fact what it avoids appearing to be. On the other hand, when a person is shamelessly and notoriously wicked, then, the more freely he commits every kind of evil, the more he thinks it lawful, and in imagining it lawful, he is thereby without doubt immersed in it all the more. Therefore, it is written, "They have proclaimed abroad their sin as Sodom, and they have not hid it." For if Sodom had concealed its sin, it would still have sinned, but in fear. But it had completely lost the curb of fear, in that it did not seek even darkness in its sinning. Therefore, it is said again, "The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is multiplied." For sin in words is sin in act, but sin that is cried out is sin committed with deliberation.

The climax of your sin is that you hate the righteous one whom you killed, as well as those who by his grace are godly, righteous and loving. It is for this reason that the Lord said, "Woe to their soul, because they have taken evil counsel against themselves, saying, 'Let us take away the just one, for he is distasteful to us.' " Although you did not offer a sacrifice to Baal, like your ancestors, and did not offer cakes in groves and on hills to the heavenly army, you did not accept the Lord's Christ. Whoever does not know Christ does not know the will of God. Whoever rejects and hates him obviously rejects and hates the one who sent him. Whoever does not have faith in him does not believe the words of the prophets who preached his good news and proclaimed him to all people.

Third, from the publication of their sin, whence he says: the show of their countenance, because by their countenance they make their sin to be shown to others; has answered them, in punishment as to their bearing; and as to the commendation of their sin, he says: and they have proclaimed abroad their sin as Sodom, that is, they have praised it: you had a harlot's forehead, you would not blush (Jer 3:3).

111. This is explained otherwise in the Gloss: the show of their countenance, that is, the knowledge of their sins, which they will have in their intellect, because the senses are in the countenance, has answered them, who ask why they are punished.

Or otherwise: the show of their countenance, that is, the remorse of conscience, has answered them, as punishment. And mystically, this refers to the sin of those who saw Christ and did not wish to know him, because of which their conscience reproves them, as the Gloss says. And because the justice of God does not allow such grave evils to be unpunished, therefore woe to their souls, not only to their bodies, for evils have been rendered to them, in the foreknowledge of God; or the past tense is used here for the future.

For he [Jesus] had done so many good works among them. He had given sight to the blind, feet to the lame, the power of walking to the palsied, life also to the dead; for all these good works they paid him death as his price, appraised at thirty pieces of silver. It is related also in the Gospels that he was bound. This also the word of prophecy had foretold by Isaiah, saying, "Woe to their soul, who have devised a most evil device against themselves, saying, 'Let us bind the just one, seeing that he is unprofitable to us.' "

The aforesaid Scribes and Pharisees therefore placed James upon the pinnacle of the temple, and cried out to him and said: 'You just one, in whom we ought all to have confidence, forasmuch as the people are led astray after Jesus, the crucified one, declare to us, what is the gate of Jesus.'

And he answered with a loud voice, 'Why do you ask me concerning Jesus, the Son of Man? He himself sits in heaven at the right hand of the great Power, and is about to come upon the clouds of heaven.'

And when many were fully convinced and gloried in the testimony of James, and said, 'Hosanna to the Son of David,' these same Scribes and Pharisees said again to one another, 'We have done badly in supplying such testimony to Jesus. But let us go up and throw him down, in order that they may be afraid to believe him.'

And they cried out, saying, 'Oh! Oh! The just man is also in error.' And they fulfilled the Scripture written in Isaiah, 'Let us take away the just man, because he is troublesome to us: therefore they shall eat the fruit of their doings.' [Isaiah 3:10 LXX]

So they went up and threw down the just man, and said to each other, 'Let us stone James the Just.' And they began to stone him, for he was not killed by the fall; but he turned and knelt down and said, 'I entreat you, Lord God our Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.' [Luke 23:34]

(Verses 10, 11.) Woe to their souls, for evil has been repaid to them. Speak to the righteous, for they are well, for they have eaten the fruit of their inventions. Woe to the wicked for evil, for the retribution of his hands will be upon him. According to the Hebrew and other interpreters, this is the meaning: Woe to them because they have received their own wickedness. Therefore, you who hear or read the book of the Prophet, praise the righteousness of God, for he has done good, for the wicked have consumed the labors of their hands. And woe to the impious people for evil has befallen them: for they have received what they deserve. And he who delivered his ruler to Roman authority, he himself is subject to Roman servitude. According to the Septuagint interpreters who said: Woe to their soul: for they have devised a wicked plan against themselves, saying: Let us bind the just, for he is useless to us: therefore they shall eat the fruit of their own works, clearly refers to the passion of Christ, that they have devised a wicked plan, not so much against the just, as against themselves and their own soul: and now they shall eat the fruit of their own works. For whatever a man sows, that he will also reap (Gal. VI, 5-8), and each one will bear his own burden.

112. And lest the punishment be supposed to envelop everyone, to this is added the justice of God in the separation of the good from the wicked; and concerning this, he does two things.

First, he places the recompense of the good, saying, say to the just man, to any just man, that it is well, it will be for him, when the others are condemned, for the fruit, that is, his reward, he shall eat of his devices, as if taking the fruit of his good inventions. For just as the wicked are solicitous to find ways to sin, so the good are solicitous to find how they might please God: he that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord: how he may please God (1 Cor 7:32); for you shall eat the labors of your hands: blessed are you (Ps 127[128]:2).

115. It should be noted on verse 10 above, say to the just man that . . . he shall eat the fruit, that the fruit of the just man is:

first, that which he returns, and this is the fruit of his activity: you should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain (John 15:16); of his preaching: let us offer the sacrifice of praise always to God, that is to say, the fruit of lips confessing to his name (Heb 13:15); of his confession.

Second, that which he receives, and this is the fruit of remission of fault, below: the iniquity of the house of Jacob shall be forgiven: and this is all the fruit, that the sin thereof should be taken away (Isa 27:9); of participation of grace: but the fruit of the Spirit is, charity, joy (Gal 5:22); of contemplation of wisdom: the purchasing thereof is better than the merchandise of silver, and her fruit than the chief and purest gold (Prov 3:14).

Third, that which he seeks: in the delight of the Lord: his fruit was sweet to my palate (Song 2:3); in the society of the heavenly choir: O mountains of Israel, shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people of Israel (Ezek 36:8); in the reception of the divine gift: your plants are a paradise of pomegranates with the fruits of the orchard (Song 4:13).

Second, he places the punishment of the wicked, saying, woe to the wicked unto evil, that is, for the evil which threatens them, the reward of his hands shall be given him: the sinner has been caught in the works of his own hands (Ps 9:17[16]).

But now, what wounds can the conquered show, what injuries to gaping vitals, what tortures of the limbs, when faith did not fail in combat but perfidy arrived before the combat? Nor does the necessity of the crime excuse the one who was caught, where the crime is of the will. I do not say this to burden the cases of the brothers but rather to stimulate the brothers to prayers of satisfaction. For since it is written, "They that call you blessed send you into error and destroy the way of your steps," one who consoles the sinner with flattering blandishments furnishes the means for sinning and does not check transgressions but nourishes them. But one who rebukes at the same time that he instructs with firmer counsels urges a brother on to salvation.

Isaiah also, filled with the Holy Spirit, cries out and chides the daughters of Zion who have been defiled by gold and raiment, and he reproves those who have an abundance of harmful riches and withdraw from God for the sake of the pleasures of time.… This, God blames; this, he brands with reproach. By this he declares that they have been defiled; by this they have departed from the true adornment and have merited disgrace and shame. Having put on silk and purple, they cannot put on Christ; adorned with gold and pearls and necklaces, they have lost the adornments of the heart and soul. Who would not detest and shun what has caused another's ruin? Who would seek and take what has served as a sword and weapon for the death of another? If, on draining the cup, he who had taken the potion should die, you would know that what he drank was poison; if, after taking food, he who had taken it should perish, you would know that what could kill, when taken, was deadly. Seeing this you would not eat nor would you drink from that which had been used by those who died. Now what ignorance of the truth it is, what madness of mind to wish for what has always been and still is harmful, and to think that you yourself will not perish from the same causes from which you know that others have perished!

Let us hearken to God, as he proclaims through Isaiah: "O my people, they that call you blessed lead you astray, throw you down headlong." Who is more guilty of throwing the people of God down headlong? He who relies on the power of the free will and scorns the help of the Creator and is secure in his own will, or he who fears the judgment of God at every thought of his precepts?

The Lord speaks by the mouth of Isaiah, saying, "O my people, they who call you happy cause you to err and destroy the way of your paths." How do you help me by telling my misdeeds to others? You may, without my knowing of it, hurt someone else by telling of my sins (or rather of those sins you slanderously attribute to me). While you are eager to spread the news everywhere, you may pretend to confide in individual people, giving them the impression that you have not talked to anyone else. This behavior is not intended to correct me but to indulge your own failings. The Lord commands that those who sin against us are to be approached privately or in the presence of a witness. If the one who is confronted continues in sin, then he or she is to be regarded as a heathen and a publican.

(Verse 12.) My people have been plundered by their own exactors, and women have been dominated by them. Concerning the women, whom Symmachus alone has interpreted, they are called Nasim () in Hebrew: Aquila and the LXX translated it as ἀπαιτοῦντας, which means exactors; Theodotion translated it as δανειστὰς, which means moneylenders. The prophetic discourse is speaking against the Scribes and Pharisees, who, for the sake of shameful gain, denied the Son of God in order to receive tithes and firstfruits. And he does not call them teachers, scribes, and doctors, but tax collectors (Luke 20), who think that making a profit is piety: and they devour, not only the houses of widows, contrary to the Apostle, but the entire population; and accusing their extravagance and shameful conduct, he calls them not only tax collectors, as if they were demanding money from the unwilling; but also women: because they do everything for the sake of pleasure, and are devoted to indulgence. Therefore, let us be careful that we do not become extortioners among the people; that our senate does not resemble the impious Porphyry ruling over matrons and women in the churches, and that favoritism towards women does not judge the priestly order.

Those who are zealous in the service of God, however, do not get a reward of praise, nor indeed do those who are concerned about the laws of God look for this return. For praise is often known to injure many, since it makes them less attuned and slows their pace. If a person thinks he has reached the goal of his endeavor—and praise gives him to understand that he has—he stops his race and victory eludes him. This was revealed by the God of the universe, speaking through the prophet: "My people, they that call you blessed, the same deceive you and destroy the way of your steps." For praise slackens the intensity of their zeal and prevents them from reaching the goal.

113. As for my people. Here the oppression of the people is denounced, in as far as it is the sin of the man who oppresses them, and this divided into two parts:

in the first, the vice of oppression is set out;

in the second, the judgment of punishment is introduced, where it says, the Lord stands up to judge (Isa 3:13).

Now, certain people were oppressing them in three ways.

First, princes were oppressing them by pillaging them through violence, and as to this he says, as for my people, their oppressors have stripped them of their goods: the people of the land have used oppression, and committed robbery: they afflicted the needy and poor (Ezek 22:29).

Second, women, by drawing them to sensual desire and even to idolatry, as is told of Solomon in 1 Kings 11, and as to this he says: their women have ruled over them: give not the power of your soul to a woman, lest she enter upon your strength (Sir 9:2).

Third, prophets, by deceiving through the cunning of flattery, and as to this he says: O my people, as if to say: I had been accustomed to speak to you through the prophets, but because they are deceitful, I will speak to you myself, lest he not seem credible because one prophet is against another.

The same deceive you, in promising security; and destroy, in offering an occasion of sin: thus says the Lord concerning the prophets that make my people err: that bite with their teeth, and preach peace (Mic 3:5); the prophets say to them: you shall not see the sword, and there shall be no famine among you, but he will give you true peace in this place (Jer 14:13).

(Verse 13) My people, who call you blessed, themselves deceive you, and they scatter or disturb the path of your steps. He had called the scribes and Pharisees tax collectors, not teachers; and above them, the mockers, who, because of gifts that blind even the wise, not only did not correct sinners in the people, but praised them for their wealth and gain: calling them blessed, and pillars of the house of God, and other things that flatterers usually say. He is therefore the Ecclesiastical doctor who provokes tears, not laughter, who rebukes sinners, who says that no one is blessed, no one is happy: nor does he preempt the judgment of his own sentence, as the Holy Scripture says (Eccl. II, 30): Do not call any man blessed before his death. But also in another place we read (Prov. XXVII, 14): He who blesses his friend loudly in the morning is no different from a slanderer. Therefore, despising the judgments of men, let us not boast in their praises, nor be saddened by their criticisms: but let us enter the right way, and the well-trodden paths of the holy prophets: let us hear Jeremiah the prophet saying: Stand in the ways, and see: and ask for the eternal paths of the Lord, which is the good way: and walk in it (Jer. VI, 16). But if at any time we have wandered and, like perverse men, have proceeded along a wrong path, let us await the promises of the Lord through Ezekiel, saying: I will give them another way, and a different heart (Ezek. 36). However, the corruptors and disturbers have perverted the way of the Lord, so that, having the key of knowledge, neither did they enter themselves, nor did they allow the people to enter; but they caused them to lose the way of truth, which speaks in the Gospel: I am the way, and the life, and the truth (John XIV, 6).

(Ver. 13, 14.) The Lord stands to judge: and he stands to judge the people. The Lord will come to judgment with the elders of his people, and with his princes. The people, who were deceived because of their simplicity and lack of knowledge, are still called the people of God: and therefore they are judged, that they may be saved. The Lord does not sit in the attire of a judge, as we read in Daniel: Thrones were set up, and books were opened (Dan. VII, 9): but he stands to judge, and he stands to judge the people, desiring them to stand, whose way had been scattered. But against the leaders and elders of his own people he comes to judgment, not to judge, but to be judged equally, granting them a place of defense if they are able to have a response, according to what is said in the fiftieth psalm: That you may be justified in your words and prevail when you are judged (Verse 6). In the prophet Micah also, we read something similar (Chapter 6), which we have interpreted in its proper place. Therefore, this passage is understood to be directed against the Pharisees and the Second Law scholars. But I think that this existed among the old people between the elders and the leaders, which now exists between the priests and the bishops.

For you have devoured my vineyard; the plunder of the poor is in your houses. Why do you crush my people, and grind the faces of the poor? Thus did the LXX interpret, confuse. He keeps the prophetic custom, to suddenly change faces. For the Lord himself had said: My people, those who bless you deceive you. And later the Prophet added: The Lord stands to judge; the Lord will come to judge. Therefore, after the prophet, the Lord himself, who had come for judgment with the elders of his people and its princes, speaks to them and rebukes the wrongdoers: Why are you grazing my vineyard? about which it is written: You have transplanted a vineyard from Egypt (Ps. LXXIX, 9). And in this same prophet: The vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel (Isai. V, 7). The Lord also placed this vineyard in the Gospel in the hands of wicked farmers who killed the son of the householder that was sent to them (Matthew XXVIII). He says: Robbery of the poor in your houses. Receive the poor or the needy simply, who is in need of alms; or certainly the poor in spirit, of whom it is written: Blessed is he who understands the poor and the needy (Ps. 40:1). And the Apostle Paul: Only, he says, that we should be mindful of the poor (Gal. 2:10). And what follows: Why do you trample on my people and crush the faces of the poor, or confuse them, it is clearly said to the leaders of the Jews. But it can also be referred to our leaders, if they crush the subjected plebs, and publicly accuse and embarrass the poor delinquents, but do not dare to even touch the wealthier sinners. And the plunder of the poor is in their own homes, when they fill their treasuries, and they misuse the resources of the Church for their pleasure, and they either keep for themselves or distribute to their relatives the public funds that were given for the support of the poor, thus making the poverty of others their own wealth.

114. The Lord stands up to judge. Here the judgment for punishing the oppressors is introduced, and this is divided into two parts:

in the first, the judgment against the oppressing princes is set out,

in the second, the judgment against the women, where it says, and the Lord said (Isa 3:16).

The false prophets were deceiving the people to despoil them, and therefore they have the same judgment as the princes: they violated me among my people, for a handful of barley, and a piece of bread (Ezek 13:19).

Concerning the first, he does three things.

First, the judge is introduced; hence he says: the Lord stands up to judge: he shall judge many peoples (Mic 4:3); the judgment sat, and the books were opened (Dan 7:10).

Therefore, coming with all angels, together with him he shall have the saints also. For plainly says Isaiah also, "He shall come to judgment with the elders of the people." Those "elders of the people," then, those called "angels" in this passage, those thousands of many people made perfect coming from the whole world, are called "heaven."

For not alone he shall come to judgment but with the elders of his people, to whom he has promised that they shall sit upon thrones to judge, who even shall judge angels. These are the clouds Isaiah is speaking of.

Second, the matter is introduced; hence he says: the Lord will enter into judgment with the ancients of his people, namely, with the priests, and its princes, kings and leaders: behold I will judge between cattle and cattle, between rams and he goats (Ezek 34:17).

Third, the cause is set out: and first, the accusation of the plaintiff is introduced, when he says, you have devoured: they have eaten the flesh of my people (Mic 3:3).

But, says someone, "Are these things to be understood of the Lord? Could the Lord be held prisoner by men and dragged to judgment?" Of this also the same prophet shall convince you. For he says, "The Lord himself shall come into judgment with the elders and princes of the people." The Lord is judged then according to the prophet's testimony, and not only judged but scourged and slapped on the face with the palms [of men's hands], and spit on, and suffers every insult and indignity for our sake. And because all who should hear these things preached by the apostles would be perfectly amazed, therefore also the prophet speaking in their person exclaims, "Lord, who has believed our report?" For it is incredible that God, the Son of God, should be spoken of and preached as having suffered these things. For this reason they are foretold by the prophets, lest any doubt should spring up in those who are about to believe.

Chapter 11, Verses 1-2. And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished instructing His twelve disciples, that He departed from there to teach and preach in their cities. It is not as if He was unaware and asking; for He had already shown the others who were unaware, saying: Behold, the Lamb of God, behold Him who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29), and He had heard the voice of the Father, thundering: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased (Matthew 3:17). But the Savior asks where Lazarus has been laid, so that those who were indicating the place of the tomb would at least be prepared to see the dead man rising again, and the disciples would be sent to Christ to witness the signs and miracles, so that through this opportunity they would believe in Him and learn from their Master. But the disciples of John, through their pride against the Lord, and their envy and malicious opposition, also revealed their thoughts in a superior manner, as the Evangelist reports: Then the disciples of John approached him, saying: Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but your disciples do not fast (Ibid., IX, 14)? And in another place: Master, to whom you gave testimony at the Jordan, look, his disciples are baptizing and everyone is coming to him (John III, 26), as if to say: We are being abandoned, there is a scarcity here, while a crowd gathers around him.

(in Luc. 7. 19.) And perhaps the two disciples sent are the two people; those of the Jews, and those of the Gentiles who believed.

(non occ.) The Evangelist had shown above how by Christ's miracles and teaching, both His disciples and the multitudes had been instructed; he now shows how this instruction had reached even to John's disciples, so that they seemed to have some jealousy towards Christ; John, when he had heard in his bonds the works of Christ, sent two of his disciples to say unto him, Art thou he that should come, or look we for another?

(non occ.) But it ought to be observed, that Jerome and Gregory did not say that John was to proclaim Christ's coming to the world beneath, to the end that the unbelievers there might be converted to the faith, but that the righteous who abode in expectation of Christ, should be comforted by His near approach.

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

(Hom. in Ev. vi. 1.) We must enquire how John, who is a prophet and more than a prophet, who made known the Lord when He came to be baptized, saying, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world!—why, when he was afterwards cast into prison, he should send his disciples to ask, Art thou he that should come, or look we for another? Did he not know Him whom he had pointed out to others; or was he uncertain whether this was He, whom by foretelling, by baptizing, and by making known, he had proclaimed to be He?

(Aug, ubi sup) But this question may be answered in a better way if we attend to the order of time. At the waters of Jordan he had affirmed that this was the Redeemer of the world after he was thrown into prison, he enquires if this was He that should come—not that he doubted that this was the Redeemer of the world, but he asks that he may know whether He who in His own person had come into the world, would in His own person descend also to the world below.

A fuller spiritual meaning is to be found in these actions, which were being accomplished in and through John. Here we behold the efficient power of John's embodied action and also the grace manifest in John. As announced in prophecy: the law rose up and took shape in John. For the law announced Christ, predicted the forgiveness of sins and promised the kingdom of heaven. John thoroughly accomplished all this work that belonged to the law. Therefore when the law (i.e., John) was inactive, oppressed as it was by the sins of the common people and held in chains by the vicious habits of the nation, so that Christ could not be perceived, the law (represented by John) was confined by chains and the prison. But the law (i.e., John) sent others to behold the good news. In this way unbelief would be confronted with the accomplished truth of what had been prophesied. By this means the part of the law that had been chained by the misdeeds of sinners would now be freed through the understanding of the good news freely expressed.

John then is providing not for his own, but his disciples' ignorance; that they might know that it was no other whom he had proclaimed, he sent them to see His works, that the works might establish what John had spoken; and that they should not look for any other Christ, than Him to whom His works had borne testimony.

In these things which were done concerning John, there is a deep store of mystic meaning. The very condition and circumstances of a prophet are themselves a prophecy. John signifies the Law; for the Law proclaimed Christ, preaching remission of sins, and giving promise of the kingdom of heaven. Also when the Law was on the point of expiring, (having been, through the sins of the people, which hindered them from understanding what it spake of Christ, as it were shut up in bonds and in prison,) it sends men to the contemplation of the Gospel, that unbelief might see the truth of its words established by deeds.

But what follows is completely among the controverted points. Of what nature then is this? Their saying, "Art Thou He that should come, or do we look for another?" That is, he that knew Him before His miracles, he that had learned it of the Spirit, he who had heard it of the Father, he who had proclaimed Him before all men; doth he now send to learn of Him, whether it be Himself or no? And if yet thou didst not know that it is surely He, how thinkest thou thyself credible, affirming as thou dost concerning things, whereof thou art ignorant? For he that is to bear witness to others, must be first worthy of credit himself. Didst thou not say, "I am not meet to loose the latchet of His shoe?" Didst thou not say, "I knew Him not, but He that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and resting upon Him, the same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost?" Didst thou not see the Spirit in form of a dove? didst thou not hear the voice? Didst thou not utterly forbid Him, saying, "I have need to be baptized of Thee?" Didst thou not say even to thy disciples, "He must increase, I must decrease?" Didst thou not teach all the people, that "He should baptize them with the Holy Ghost and with fire?" and that He "is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world?" Didst thou not before His signs and miracles proclaim all these things? How then now, when He hath been made manifest to all, and the fame of Him hath gone out everywhere, and dead men have been raised, and devils driven away, and a display made of so great miracles, dost thou after this send to learn of Him?

What then is the fact? Were all these sayings a kind of fraud: a stage play and fables? Nay, who that hath any understanding would say so? I say not, John, who leaped in the womb, who before his own birth proclaimed Him, the citizen of the wilderness, the exhibitor of the conversation of angels; but even though he were one of the common sort, and of them that are utterly outcast, he would not have hesitated, after so many testimonies, both on his own part and on the part of others.

Whence it is evident, that neither did he send as being himself in doubt, nor did he ask in ignorance. Since no one surely could say this, that though he knew it fully, yet on account of his prison he was become rather timid: for neither was he looking to be delivered therefrom, nor if he did look for it, would he have betrayed his duty to God, armed as he was against various kinds of death. For unless he had been prepared for this, he would not have evinced so great courage towards a whole people, practised in shedding blood of prophets; nor would he have rebuked that savage tyrant with so much boldness in the midst of the city and the forum, severely chiding him, as though he were a little child, in hearing of all men. And even if he were grown more timid, how was he not ashamed before his own disciples, in whose presence he had so often borne witness unto Him, but asked his question by them, which he should have done by others? And yet surely he knew full well, that they too were jealous of Christ, and desired to find some handle against Him. And how could he but be abashed before the Jewish people, in whose presence he had proclaimed such high things? Or what advantage accrued to him thereby, towards deliverance from his bonds? For not for Christ's sake had he been cast into prison, nor for having proclaimed His power, but for his own rebuke touching the unlawful marriage.

For what intent then did he send to ask? John's disciples were starting aside from Jesus, and this surely any one may see, and they had always a jealous feeling towards Him. And it is plain, from what they said to their master: "He that was with thee," it is said, "beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come unto Him." And again, "There arose a question between John's disciples and the Jews about purifying." And again they came unto Him, and said, "Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but Thy disciples fast not?" For as yet they knew not who Christ was, but imagining Jesus to be a mere man, but John greater than after the manner of man, were vexed at seeing the former held in estimation, but the latter, as he had said, now ceasing. And this hindered them from coming unto Him, their jealousy quite blocking up the access. Now so long as John was with them, he was exhorting them continually and instructing them, and not even so did he persuade them; but when he was now on the point of dying, he uses the more diligence: fearing as he did lest he might leave a foundation for bad doctrine, and they continue broken off from Christ. For as he was diligent even at first to bring to Christ all that pertained to himself; so on his failing to persuade them, now towards his end he does but exert the more zeal.

Now if he had said, "Go ye away unto Him, He is better than I," he would not have persuaded them, minded as they were not easily to be separated from him, but rather he would have been thought to say it out of modesty, and they would have been the more rivetted to him; or if he had held his peace, then again nothing was gained. What then doth he? He waits to hear from them that Christ is working miracles, and not even so doth he admonish them, nor doth he send all, but some two (whom he perhaps knew to be more teachable than the rest); that the inquiry might be made without suspicion, in order that from His acts they might learn the difference between Jesus and himself. And he saith, Go ye, and say, "Art thou He that should come, or do we look for another?"

But this seems hardly reasonable. For John was not in ignorance of His death, but was the first to preach it, saying, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world. For thus calling Him the Lamb, he plainly shews forth the Cross; and no otherwise than by the Cross did He take away the sins of the world. Also how is he a greater prophet than these, if he knew not those things which all the prophets knew, for Isaiah says, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter. (Is. 53:7.)

But is this a more reasonable explanation than the other? for why then did he not say, Art Thou Ho that is coming to the world beneath? and not simply, Art thou he that is to come? And the reason of his seeking to know, namely, that he might preach Him there, is even ridiculous. For the present life is the time of grace, and after death the judgment and punishment; therefore there was no need of a forerunner thither. Again, if the unbelievers who should believe after death should be saved, then none would perish; all would then repent and worship; for every knee shall bow, both of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth. (Phil. 2:10)

Yet whilst John was with them he held them rightly convinced concerning Christ. But when he was going to die, he was more concerned on their behalf. For he feared that he might leave his disciples a prey to some pernicious doctrine, and that they should remain separate from Christ, to whom it had been his care to bring all his followers from the beginning. Had he said to them, Depart from me, for He is better than me, he would not have prevailed with them, as they would have supposed that he spoke this in humility, which opinion would have drawn them more closely to him. What then does he? He waits to hear through them that Christ works miracles. Nor did he send all, but two only, (whom perhaps he chose as more ready to believe than the rest,) that the reason of his enquiry might be unsuspected, and that from the things themselves which they should see they might understand the difference between him and Jesus.

About this text, some will argue, "When John sent his disciples, he was neither ignorant himself nor did he mean for them to learn, which seems clear to anyone who has entered to a certain extent into the meaning of the holy Scriptures." But this is foolish, because when John was about to die and join the departed, he sent them to ask whether he was the one who was to come and free those who had been vanquished by death. In this way the good news was delivered to his disciples as well. John had already said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world." He already knew very well that the Messiah would offer his suffering up to God for the sake of all humanity. Certainly, if John indeed knew that Jesus was the Christ, he was not ignorant of the Christ. On the contrary, he knew exactly what benefits were to come to humanity through him. John might seem to be telling different people different things in different contexts. Isn't it true that John had so much knowledge about Christ that he said a great deal about him to various people? Isn't it true that in accordance with the greater part of what John had said in his own testimony, he recognized Jesus as the deliverer of good news? It is hardly conceivable that John was ignorant about the Christ but now was guessing and wanted to find out for sure from him. That would be inconsistent. And who would, in the attempt to discover something so great, send along his disciples as if they were competent in themselves to teach and witness?There is another point being made here. The present life is the time when we must conduct ourselves responsibly. After death there is judgment and punishment. However, Christ's death did not universally redeem the sins of all those who had already died. For when it is said that the bronze gates and iron bars were shattered, this is said because the body of Christ then appeared immortal for the first time and death was shown to be defeated. What does this mean, then? Were all people unrighteous before the coming of Christ? Not at all. Before Christ it was enough to refrain from idolatry and to worship the one true God in order to be saved. But now that alone is not enough. We must also know Christ personally. And so we must not imagine that someone will confess to Christ in hell, where even if all repent, no one is comforted.

John did not ask as if he himself did not know Christ. How could this be when he had borne witness to Him, saying, "Behold the Lamb of God"? But because his disciples were jealous of Christ, John sent them to acquire more evidence, so that by seeing the miracles they might believe that Christ is greater than John. This is why he himself pretends to ask, "Art Thou He that cometh?" that is, He Whose coming in the flesh is awaited in the Scriptures. Some believe that by saying, "He that cometh," he was asking about the descent into hades, as if, not knowing the answer, John were questioning, "Art Thou He that goeth even into hades, or should we look for another?" But this is foolishness, for how could John, who was greater than the prophets, not know of the crucifixion of Christ and the descent into hades, when he had called Christ the Lamb Who would be sacrificed for us? John knew, therefore, that the Lord would also go down into hades in the soul so that even there, as St. Gregory the Theologian says, He might save those who would have believed if He had become incarnate in their day. John did not ask this because he did not know the answer, but rather because he wanted to provide his disciples with the evidence of Christ's miracles. Look, then, how Christ answers this question:

Now when John heard in prison about the works of Christ. The teaching of Christ has been mentioned and confirmed; the preachers have been instructed. Now the rebellious are calmed: first, he sets John's disciples at rest; secondly, the scribes (c. 14).

In regard to the first he does three things: first, he quiets the doubters; secondly, he rebukes the crowds (v. 16); thirdly, he gives thanks for the apostles' faith (v. 25).

In regard to the first a question is asked; secondly, the answer (v. 4).

He says, therefore: When he heard in prison about the works of Christ. This was the occasion for sending them. The same is presented in Luke (5:18) but in a different order. He says, therefore, that he was in prison as above (c. 4). Then Jesus began to work miracles. And this was fitting, that the sun not appear, while clouds were present: "The law and the prophets until John" (Mt 11:13). The works, i.e., the miracles, of Christ, he sent two of his disciples to say to him. Some try to condemn John for this, because he wondered whether he was the Christ, and it is obvious that one in doubt about the faith is an unbeliever.

Ambrose on Luke says that this was not a question proceeding from unbelief but from piety; for he is not speaking about his coming into the world but of his coming to the Passion. Hence he wonders if he had come to suffer, as Peter said. "This will never happen to you" (Mt 16:22). On the other hand, Chrysostom says that John already knew from the beginning, when he said: "behold the Lamb of God" (Jn 1:28). It is clear, therefore, that he knew him to be a victim to be sacrificed. Hence he is commended here for being more than a prophet; but prophets knew future events. Gregory gives another reason, namely, that it is not a question about coming into the world or to the Passion but about descending into hell; because John was close to the time for going to hell, he wanted to be made certain. Are you he who is to come? But Chrysostom objects to this. For those who are in hell it is a state of punishment; hence it seems that he would have asked this without reason. But this is not contrary to Gregory, because he did not wish to announce conversion to the captives, but to the just, that they might rejoice. Another reason is that the Lord often puts questions, not because he was not sure, but to remove calumny, as in John (11:34) he asked about Lazarus: "Where have you placed him?" not because he did not know, but so those who showed him the tomb could not deny or calumniate. Therefore, it was the same with John. Because his disciples were suspicious of Christ, he sent them, not because he was in doubt, but in order that they not suspect but confess him. But why did he not send them before? Because he was always with them before and assured them; but since he wanted to depart from them, he wanted them to be made certain about Christ.

(in Luc. 7. 19.) Some understand it thus; That it was a great thing that John should be so far a prophet, as to acknowledge Christ, and to preach remission of sin; but that like a pious prophet, he could not think that He whom he had believed to be He that should come, was to suffer death; he doubted therefore though not in faith, yet in love. So Peter also doubted, saying, This be far from thee, Lord; this shall not be unto thee. (Mat. 16:22.)

It is indeed certain, that he who as forerunner proclaimed Christ's coming, as prophet knew Him when He stood before him, and worshipped Him as Confessor when He came to him, could not fall into error from such abundant knowledge. Nor can it be believed that the grace of the Holy Spirit failed him when thrown into prison, seeing He should hereafter minister the light of His power to the Apostles when they were in prison.

John asks this not because he is ignorant but to guide others who are ignorant and to say to them, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" And he had heard the voice of the Father saying, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased." Rather, it is the same sort of question as when the Savior asked where Lazarus was buried. The people only meant to show him the tomb, but he wanted them to be brought to faith and see the dead man return to life. Similarly, when John was about to be killed by Herod, he sent his disciples to Christ, intending that when they met him, the disciples would observe his appearance and powers and believe in him, and they would tell this to their teacher when he questioned them.

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

(Verse 3.) Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect another? He does not say, 'You are the one who has come,' but rather, 'You are the one who is to come.' And the meaning is this: Send to me, because I am about to descend into the underworld, whether I should announce you to the dead, who I have announced to the living? Does it not befit the Son of God to taste death, and to send another to these sacraments?

Hence he frames his question thus, Art thou he that is to come? Not, Art Thou he that hast come? And the sense is, Direct me, since I am about to go down into the lower parts of the earth, whether I shall announce Thee to the spirits beneath also; or whether Thou as the Son of God may not taste death, but will send another to this sacrament?

Therefore he does not ask as being himself ignorant. But as the Saviour asks where Lazarus is buried (John 11:34.), in order that they who shewed. Him the sepulchre might be so far prepared for faith, and believe that the dead was verily raised again—so John, about to be put to death by Herod, sends his disciples to Christ, that by this opportunity of seeing His signs and wonders they might believe on Him, and so might learn through their master's enquiry. But John's disciples had somewhat of bitterness and jealousy towards the Lord, as their former enquiry showed, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?

He says, therefore, Are you he who is to come, or look we for another? It is true that our fathers awaited you, as it says in Exodus (c. 4).