Monday of the 4th week after Pentecost

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.

(Ver. 4, 5.) And Jesus answered and said to them, 'Go and tell John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised up.' John had asked through his disciples: 'Are You the Coming One, or do we look for another?' Jesus shows the signs, not responding to what had been asked, but to the stumbling block of the messengers: 'Go and tell John the things which you hear and see: The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up.' And what is no less important about these things,

The poor are evangelized. Either the poor in spirit, or certainly the poor in wealth (or works), so that there is no distinction in preaching between the noble and the lowly, the rich and the needy. These things confirm the strictness of the teacher, the truth of the instructor, that all are equal before him who can be saved. And what he says:

This last is no less than the first. And understand it as if it had been said, Even the poor; that so between noble and mean, rich and poor, there may be no difference in preaching. This approves the strictness of the master, this the truth of the teacher, that in His sight every one who can be saved is equal.

But Christ knowing the purpose of John, did not say, I am He; for this would again have offended the hearers, although this was what it naturally followed for Him to say, but He leaves them to learn it from His acts. For it saith, "when these were come to Him, then He cured many." And yet what congruity was there, that being asked, "Art thou He," He should say nothing to that, but should presently cure them that were sick; unless it had been His mind to establish this which I have mentioned? Because they of course would account the testimony of His deeds surer, and more above suspicion than that of His words.

Knowing therefore, as being God, the mind with which John had sent them, He straightway cured blind, lame, and many others; not to teach him (for how should He him that was convinced), but these that were doubting: and having healed them, He saith, "Go and show John again those things which ye do hear and see; the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, and the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached unto them." And he added, "And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me;" implying that He knows even their unuttered thoughts. For if He had said, "I am He," both this would have offended them, as I have already said; and they would have thought, even if they had not spoken, much as the Jews said to Him, "Thou bearest record of Thyself." Wherefore He saith not this Himself, but leaves them to learn all from the miracles, freeing what He taught from suspicion, and making it plainer. Wherefore also He covertly added His reproof of them. That is, because they were "offended in Him," He by setting forth their case and leaving it to their own conscience alone, and by calling no witness of this His accusation, but only themselves that knew it all, did thus also draw them the more unto Himself, in saying, "Blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me." For indeed His secret meaning was of them when He said this.

He did not say, "Declare unto John that I am He that cometh." But knowing that John had sent his disciples to see the miracles, He said, "Tell John what you see, and certainly he will use that opportunity to bear witness more fully to you concerning Me." By the words "the poor have the good tidings" understand either those preaching the Gospel, that is, the apostles, who were poor fishermen and despised as common lowly people, or those listening to the Gospel and hearing of the eternal good things.

And Jesus answered them. Here Christ's answer is given. John and many disciples, as John says (c. 4). Therefore, there was a dispute among them, because they saw Christ's works and preferred him to John. But seeing John's abstinence, they prefer him to Christ. Hence, first he proposes the question; secondly, he commends John (v. 10).

In regard to the first he answers in terms of his coming and Passion. The time will come, when God will suffer and many will be scandalized, because "to the Jews a scandal" (1 Cor 1:23). Hence he answers when this will be. According to Chrysostom he wants to show that he whom the prophets had foretold has come. Hence three things were promised by the prophets: sometimes the coming of God, by some the coming of a new teacher, by some the coming of sanctification and redemption. How shall we say then that he will come? And he answers in the same way Isaiah (35:4) answers: "Behold God will come and save us." Hence you will see those miracles. Go and tell John what you hear in the teachings and see in the miracles. Again, a teacher was promised: "Be glad, O sons of Zion..., because he has given you a teacher of justice" (Jl 2:22).

The blind see..., and this literally. Then if you ask when he will come: "The spirit of the Lord is upon me; he has sent me to preach to the meek" (Is 61:1), and this is signified when he says the poor have the Gospel preached to them, i.e., poverty will be blessed. Hence above (5:3); "Blessed are the poor in spirit..." and Luke (4:18): "The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor." Again, someone holy will come to sanctify sinners; hence Isaiah (8:13): "The Lord of hosts, him you shall regard as holy."

But if we speak in the moral sense, the entire process of man's sanctification is signified. For the sinner first suffers blindness, when the reason is darkened: "Like the untimely birth that never sees the sun" (Ps 58:8); "Bring forth the people who are blind but have eyes" (Is 43:8). He is said to be lame, when the mind is drawn to various things, as it says in 1 Kings (18:21): "How long will you go limping with two different opinions?" Likewise, he becomes ulcerous in treachery and leprous, because then he cannot be recalled and infects others. After that he becomes deaf, because chastening is not heard. Then he dies: "Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead" (Eph 5:14). All these the Lord heals. The last are the poor in spirit, so that no health remains in them: "My loins are filled with burning, and there is not health in my flesh" (Ps 38:7). These, too, the Lord heals and they rise to a certain mental soundness, in which is true peace: "Great peace have those who love your law; nothing can make them stumble" (Ps 119:165).

But the mind of unbelievers suffered grave scandal in him when they saw him dying even after so many miracles. Hence Paul also says: "But we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews indeed a scandal, but to the Gentiles foolishness." For it seemed foolish to men that the author of life should die for mankind; and from this, man took scandal against him, from which he ought rather to have become more indebted. For God is to be honored by men all the more worthily, the more he undertook even unworthy things for mankind. What therefore does it mean to say: "Blessed is he who is not scandalized in me," except to signify openly the abjection and humility of his death? As if he were plainly saying: I indeed do wondrous things, but I do not disdain to suffer humble things. Therefore, since I follow you in dying, men must take great care not to despise in me the death, while they venerate the signs.

(Hom. in Ev. vi. 1.) Otherwise; The mind of unbelievers was greatly offended concerning Christ, because after many miracles done, they saw Him at length put to death; whence Paul speaks, We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling-block. (1 Cor. 1:23.) What then does that mean, Blessed is he who shall not be offended in me, but a direct allusion to the humiliation of His death; as much as to say, I do indeed wonderful works, but do not disdain to suffer humble things. Because then I follow you in death, men must be careful not to despise in Me My death, while they reverence My wonderful works.

And when the Lord had shown forth all of himself in miraculous works, in giving sight to the blind, the power of walking to the lame, cleansing to the lepers, hearing to the deaf, voices to the mute, life to the dead and preaching to the poor, he said, "Blessed is the one who takes no offense at me." Now, had anything really been done through Christ that would cause John to take offense? Not in the least. For John himself also spent his time in his own teaching and work. However, one ought to look to a higher meaning that is both powerful and fitting. What does it mean that the poor have good news preached to them? Poor people are those who have abandoned their lives, who have taken up his cross and followed, who have been made humble in spirit. For such the kingdom of heaven is prepared. Because all experiences of this kind come together in the Lord and because his cross was to be a source of offense to many, he declared that people are blessed if their faith is not threatened by a cross or death or burial.

This saying, that they were blessed from whom there should be no offence in Him, showed them what it was that John had provided against in sending them. For John, through fear of this very thing, had sent his disciples that they might hear Christ.

(Ver. 6.) And blessed is he who is not scandalized in me. He strikes down the messengers, as will be shown in the following.

And blessed is he who shall not be offended in me, is directed against the messengers; they were offended in Him. But He not publishing their doubts, and leaving it to their conscience alone, thus privately introduced a refutation of them.

And to show John's disciples that the thoughts they were thinking did not escape His notice, He said, "Blessed is he whosoever shall not be offended in Me," for they had many doubts about Him.

Hence to some was promised sanctification, and after they were sanctified, others would be scandalized; therefore, he says, Blessed is he who is not scandalized in me. Hence it says, "So Jesus also suffered outside the gate, in order to sanctify the people through his own blood" (Heb 13:12). Therefore, he shows the signs of his coming. But if we speak in the moral sense, the entire process of man's sanctification is signified. For the sinner first suffers blindness, when the reason is darkened: "Like the untimely birth that never sees the sun" (Ps 58:8); "Bring forth the people who are blind but have eyes" (Is 43:8). He is said to be lame, when the mind is drawn to various things, as it says in 1 Kings (18:21): "How long will you go limping with two different opinions?" Likewise, he becomes ulcerous in treachery and leprous, because then he cannot be recalled and infects others. After that he becomes deaf, because chastening is not heard. Then he dies: "Awake, O sleeper, and arise from the dead" (Eph 5:14). All these the Lord heals. The last are the poor in spirit, so that no health remains in them: "My loins are filled with burning, and there is not health in my flesh" (Ps 38:7). These, too, the Lord heals and they rise to a certain mental soundness, in which is true peace: "Great peace have those who love your law; nothing can make them stumble" (Ps 119:165).

And perhaps the two disciples sent are the two people; those of the Jews, and those of the Gentiles who believed.

But after John's disciples were dismissed, let us hear what He says to the crowds about the same John: "What did you go out into the desert to see? A reed shaken by the wind?" This He clearly brought forth not by affirming, but by denying. For a reed, as soon as a breeze touches it, bends to the other side. And what is signified by the reed but a carnal mind? Which, as soon as it is touched by favor or detraction, immediately inclines to either side. For if a breeze of favor blows from human lips, it rejoices, is lifted up, and bends itself entirely, as it were, toward grace. But if from the same place whence the breeze of praise was coming, a wind of detraction bursts forth, it immediately inclines him, as it were, to the other side, toward the violence of fury. But John was not a reed shaken by the wind, because neither did flattery make him gentle, nor did anyone's detraction make him harsh with anger. Neither did prosperity know how to lift him up, nor adversity to cast him down. Therefore John was not a reed shaken by the wind, whom no change of circumstances bent from the uprightness of his position. Let us learn therefore, dearest brothers, not to be a reed shaken by the wind; let us make firm our mind placed amid the breezes of tongues, let the posture of our mind stand unbending. Let no detraction provoke us to anger, and let no favor incline us to the relaxation of useless grace. Let not prosperity lift us up, nor adversity disturb us, so that we who are fixed in the solidity of faith may in no way be moved by the changeableness of passing things.

(Hom. in Ev. vi. 2.) This He proposes, not to assert, but to deny. For if but a breath of air touch a reed, it bends it one way or other; a type of the carnal mind, which leans to either side, according as the breath of praise or detraction reaches it. A reed shaken by the wind John was not, for no variety of circumstance bent him from his uprightness...

Therefore that this might not lead them to think of John as though he were offended concerning Christ, it continues, When they had gone away, Jesus began to speak to the multitudes concerning John.

(Verse 7.) But as they were departing, Jesus began to speak to the 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 to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Look, those who wear soft clothing are in the palaces of kings. If a harsh judgment had been pronounced against John, as many believe, then why is he now being praised so highly? But because the surrounding crowd did not know the mystery of the question, and thought that John doubted about Christ, whom he had pointed out with his finger, so that they would understand that John was not asking for himself, but for his disciples: Why, he said, do you go out into the desert? Is it perhaps to see a man resembling a reed that is carried by every wind, and to have doubts about the one he had previously proclaimed? Or is it possible that he is compelled by the stings of envy against me, and his preaching seeks empty glory, so that he may seek profits from it? Why does he desire riches, so that he may abound in feasts? He feeds on locusts and wild honey. Does he dress in soft clothing? The covering of his body is made of camel hair. Such food and clothing are received in the prison's lodging, and the preaching of truth has such a dwelling. But those who are flatterers and pursue gains, seeking wealth, and abound in pleasures, and dress in soft clothing, they are in the houses of kings. From which it is shown that a strict and austere life and preaching should avoid the courts of kings, and decline the palaces of soft people.

Was it for this ye went out into the desert to see a man like unto a reed, and carried about by every wind, so that in lightness of mind he doubts concerning Him whom once he preached? Or it may be he is roused against Me by the sting of envy, and he seeks empty honour by his preaching, that he may thereof make gain. Why should he covet wealth? that he may have dainty fare? But his food is locusts and wild honey. That he may wear soft raiment? But his clothing is camel's hair. This is that He adds, But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment?

Mystically; The desert is that which is deserted of the Holy Spirit, where there is no habitation of God; in the reed is signified a man who in outward show lives a pious life, but lacks all real fruit within himself, fair outside, within hollow, moved with every breath of wind, that is, with every impulse of unclean spirits, having no firmness to remain still, devoid of the marrow of the soul.

For the matter indeed of John's disciples had been ordered well, and they were gone away assured by the miracles which had just been performed; but there was need after that of remedy as regarded the people. For although they could not suspect anything of the kind of their own master, the common people might from the inquiry of John's disciples form many strange suspicions, not knowing the mind with which he sent his disciples. And it was natural for them to reason with themselves, and say, "He that bore such abundant witness, hath he now changed his persuasion, and doth he doubt whether this or another be He that should come? Can it be, that in dissension with Jesus he saith this? that the prison hath made him more timid? that his former words were spoken vainly, and at random?" It being then natural for them to suspect many such things, see how He corrects their weakness, and removes these their suspicions. For "as they departed, He began to say to the multitudes." Why, "as they departed?" That He might not seem to be flattering the man.

And in correcting the people, He doth not publish their suspicion, but adds only the solution of the thoughts that were mentally disturbing them: signifying that He knew the secrets of all men. For He saith not, as unto the Jews, "Wherefore think ye evil?" Because if they had it in their minds, not of wickedness did they so reason, but of ignorance on the points that had been spoken of. Wherefore neither doth He discourse unto them in the way of rebuke, but merely sets right their understanding, and defends John, and signifies that he is not fallen away from his former opinion, neither is he changed, not being at all a man easily swayed and fickle, but steadfast and sure, and far from being such as to betray the things committed unto him.

And in establishing this, He employs not at first his own sentence, but their former testimony, pointing out how they bare record of his firmness, not by their words only, but also by their deeds.

Wherefore He saith, "What went ye out into the wilderness to see?" as though He had said, Wherefore did ye leave your cities, and your houses, and come together all of you into the wilderness? To see a pitiful and flexible kind of person? Nay, this were out of all reason, this is not what is indicated by that earnestness, and the concourse of all men unto the wilderness. So much people and so many cities would not have poured themselves out with so great zeal towards the wilderness and the river Jordan at that time, had ye not expected to see some great and marvellous one, one firmer than any rock. Yea, it was not "a reed" surely, that "ye went out to see shaken by the wind:" for the flexible and such as are lightly brought round, and now say one thing, now another, and stand firm in nothing, are most like that.

Now His meaning is like this: He was not of himself a waverer; and this ye yourselves showed by your earnestness. Much less could any one say this, that he was indeed firm, but having made himself a slave to luxury, he afterwards became languid. For among men, some are such as they are of themselves, others become so; for instance, one man is passionate by nature, and another from having fallen into a long illness gets this infirmity. Again, some men are flexible and fickle by nature, while others become so by being slaves to luxury, and by living effeminately. "But John," saith He, "neither was such a character by nature, for neither was it a reed that ye went out to see; nor by giving himself to luxury did he lose the advantage he possessed." For that he did not make himself a slave to luxury, his garb shows, and the wilderness, and the prison. Since, had he been minded to wear soft raiment, he would not have lived in the wilderness, nor in the prison, but in the king's courts: it being in his power, merely by keeping silence, to have enjoyed honor without limit. For since Herod so reverenced him, even when he had rebuked him, and was in chains, much more would he have courted him, had he held his peace. You see, he had indeed given proof of his firmness and fortitude; and how could he justly incur suspicions of that kind?

Then lest they should say, "But what if at that time indeed he were such an one, but now is changed?" He added also what follows; his garments, his prison, and together with these the prophecy.

(in loc.) They had not gone out at this time into the desert to see John, for he was not now in the desert, but in prison; but He speaks of the past time while John was yet in the desert, and the people flocked to him.

Perhaps the multitudes heard John's question and were scandalized that even John himself might be unsure of Christ and had so quickly changed his opinion, although he had previously borne witness to Him. Christ allays this suspicion, then, by saying, John is not a reed, that is, one who changes easily. For if he were, why would you have gone out to him in the wilderness? You indeed would not have gone out to see a reed, a changeable man, but you went out to see a great and steadfast man. To be sure, he is still now what you thought him to be then.

As they went away. Here he satisfies the crowd's doubts. Although the crowds had heard John's witness to Christ, they now seemed to hesitate. For they could have three things in their heart, because a person changes his mind for three reasons: either on account of fickleness of mind, or for the sake of some profit, or on account of the human spirit's passing from ignorance of the truth to knowing it: "For God knows that the thoughts of men are vain" (Ps 94:11). Therefore, he first excludes fickleness from them; secondly, the desire for profit (v. 8); thirdly, he shows that he has prophetic truth (v. 9).

He says, therefore, As they went away. The Lord teaches us with remarkable tact, as he never wished to praise John in the presence of his disciples or anyone in his own presence: "Let another praise you and not your own mouth; a stranger and not your own lips" (Pr 27:2). Because if the one praised is good, he is embarrassed; if he is evil, he is flattered. Jesus began to preach to the crowds: "What did you go out into the desert to see? Did you go to see a reed?" No, but you went out to see a resolute man. For a reed is easily moved; hence a mind that changes quickly is regarded as a wind: "So that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro with every wind" (Eph 4:14).

(Doctr. Christ. iii. 12.) In all such things we blame not the use of the things, but the lust of those that use them. For whoever uses the good things in his reach more sparingly than are the habits of those with whom he lives, is either temperate or superstitious. Whoever again uses them in a measure exceeding the practice of the good among whom he lives, either has some meaning therein, or else is dissolute.

But still more is added about the description of him: "But what did you go out into the desert to see? A man clothed in soft garments? Behold, those who are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings." For John is described as having been clothed in woven camel's hair. And what does it mean to say, "Behold, those who are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings," except to demonstrate by a clear statement that those who flee from enduring hardships for God do not serve the heavenly King but an earthly one, but rather, devoted only to external things, they seek the softness and pleasure of the present life? Therefore let no one think that there is no sin in the extravagance and pursuit of clothing, because if this were not a fault, the Lord would in no way have praised John for the roughness of his garment. If this were not a fault, the apostle Peter would never have restrained women through his epistle from the desire for costly garments, saying: "Not in costly apparel." Consider, therefore, what a fault it is for men also to desire that from which the pastor of the Church took care to prohibit even women.

Although what is said about John not being clothed in soft garments can also be understood in another way through its symbolic meaning. For he was not clothed in soft garments because he did not nurture the life of sinners with flatteries, but rebuked them with the force of harsh denunciation, saying: "Brood of vipers, who has shown you how to flee from the wrath to come?" Hence it is also said through Solomon: "The words of the wise are like goads, and like nails driven deep." For the words of the wise are compared to nails and goads because they do not know how to caress the faults of sinners, but to pierce them.

(Hom. in Ev. vi. 3.) Let no one suppose that there is nothing sinful in luxury and rich dress; if pursuit of such things had been blameless, the Lord would not have thus commended John for the coarseness of his raiment, nor would Peter have checked the desire of fine clothes in women as he does, Not in costly raiment. (1 Pet. 3:3)

(ubi. sup.) Also John was not clothed in soft raiment, that is, he did not encourage sinners in their sinful life by speaking smooth things, but rebuked them with sharpness and rigour, saying, Generation of vipers, &c. (Mat. 3:7)

If the Lord had intended a higher meaning unfavorable to John, as many imagine that he did, in saying "Blessed is the one who takes no offense at me," why does he now speak about John with highest praise? Because the crowd that was present did not know the inner purpose of John's question. They thought John doubted Christ, although he himself had prophesied about him. Now the crowd learns that John asked not on his own behalf but on that of his disciples. "Why did you go out into the wilderness?" To see a man like a reed who is blown about by every wind, a man so irresolute that he cannot make up his mind about what he himself previously predicted? Or else, perhaps he is pricked by the goad of his envy for me, and his preaching runs after an empty fame, and he covets the money he may get by it? But why should this man desire wealth for abundance of feasting? He feeds on locusts and wild honey. Or wealth to wear soft clothes? His clothes are made of camel's hair. But people who are flatterers, and run after money, and covet wealth, and overflow with luxury and wear soft clothes—such people live in the palaces of kings. Thus it is shown that the austere way of life and the strict preaching must avoid the halls of kings and turn away from the palaces of the luxurious.

(Verse 8.) But what did you go out to see, a prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. In him, John is greater than the other prophets, because while they had predicted someone who was to come, he pointed to the one who has already come, saying: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. And because to the privilege of being a prophet, John added the reward of baptizing his Lord, it follows that he increased in merits, fulfilling the testimony of Malachi, in which even an angel is prophesied (Mal. II). However, here the term 'angel' cannot be understood as referring to John by nature, but rather by the dignity of his office, that is, as a messenger who announced the coming of the Lord.

This teaches that an austere life and strict preaching ought to shun kings' courts and the palaces of the rich and luxurious.

Mystically; By the garment wherewith his body is clothed is his mind shown, that it is lost in luxury and self-indulgence. The kings are the fallen angels; they are they who are powerful in this life, and the lords of this world. Thus, They that are clothed in soft raiment are in kings' houses; that is, those whose bodies are enervated and destroyed by luxury, it is clear are possessed by dæmons.

That Lord walked in humility and obscurity, with no definite home: for "the Son of man," said He, "hath not where to lay His head; " unadorned in dress, for else He had not said, "Behold, they who are clad in soft raiment are in kings' houses: " in short, inglorious in countenance and aspect, just as Isaiah withal had fore-announced. If, also, He exercised no right of power even over His own followers, to whom He discharged menial ministry; if, in short, though conscious of His own kingdom, He shrank back from being made a king, He in the fullest manner gave His own an example for turning coldly from all the pride and garb, as well of dignity as of power.

Denying them any basis for saying that John later became soft by giving himself over to luxury, He says, This cannot be; that his clothing is made of hair shows that he is an enemy of luxury. For if he were wearing soft clothing and living in kings' houses, if he so desired luxury he would not be in prison. So then, learn that it does not befit a true Christian to wear luxurious clothing.

Likewise, he is not inconstant as seeking profit. Why then did you go out? For all riches pertain to some bodily use, such as food or clothing. And it is evident that neither of these had any influence. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that he says this for any advantage: Why then did you go out? To see a man clothed in soft raiment? But why does he make no mention of food? Because there was no question on that point. But he was clothed in camel's hair. Hence those who wear soft raiment are not in the desert but in kings' houses. Chrysostom explains it another way: Some are lightheaded by nature, others from pleasure, as Hosea (4:11) says: "Fornication and wine and intoxication take away understanding." He removes the first by what he said above; the second, when he says, wear soft garments; therefore, he is not inconstant from the pleasures of life.

But here a question can be raised about being clothed in pleasures: Is it a sin? If not, it should not have been charged against that rich man, who dressed in purple and fine linen every day (Lk 16:19). Augustine says that such things are not to be considered, but the intention of the user; for one should be dressed after the custom of those among whom he lives. Therefore, the custom needs further clarification. Hence some dress more sparingly, some more ornately; and both ways require a distinction. If more sparingly, then it is either for a good intention, and this is good, or is for vainglory, and this is evil. If more ornately, it is on account of pride, and this is evil; or for a symbol, as a bishop or priest, and this is good. Mystically, by men who wear soft garments are signified flatterers; for he is dressed in soft garments who is mollified by complimentary words, as proud men seek glory from words: "If a ruler listens to the words of a lie, all his officials will be wicked" (Pr 29:12).

But what went you out into the desert to see? A prophet? Yes, I say to you, and more than a prophet. For the office of a prophet is to foretell things to come, not also to show them. John therefore is more than a prophet, because the one whom he had prophesied by going before, he also pointed out by showing. But since he is denied to be a reed shaken by the wind, since he is said not to be clothed in soft garments, since the name of prophet is declared to be inadequate for him, let us now hear what may worthily be said of him.

(Hom. in Ev. vi. 5.) The office of a prophet is to foretel things to come, not to show them present. John therefore is more than a prophet, because Him whom he had foretold by going before Him, the same he showed as present by pointing Him out.

In this he is also greater than the other prophets, that to his prophetic privilege is added the reward of the Baptist that he should baptize his Lord.

When therefore as well by the place, as by his garments, and by their concourse unto Him, He had delineated his character, He proceeds to bring in the prophet. For having said, "Why went ye out? To see a prophet? Yea I say unto you, and more than a prophet;" He goes on, "For this is he of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before Thy face, which shall prepare Thy way before Thee." Having before set down the testimony of the Jews, He then applies that of the prophets; or rather, He puts in the first place the sentence of the Jews, which must have been a very strong demonstration, the witness being borne by his enemies; secondly, the man's life; thirdly, His own judgment; fourthly, the prophet; by all means stopping their mouths.

Then having said, that he is greater than a prophet, He signifies also in what he is greater. And in what is he greater? In being near Him that was come. For, "I send," saith He, "my messenger before Thy face;" that is, nigh Thee. For as with kings, they who ride near the chariot, these are more illustrious than the rest, just so John also appears in his course near the advent itself. See how He signified John's excellency by this also; and not even here doth He stop, but adds afterwards His own suffrage as well.

Having described his habits of life from his dwelling-place, his dress, and the concourse of men to hear him, He now brings in that he is also a prophet, But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet.

Turning now to the law, which is properly ours-that is, to the Gospel-by what kind of examples are we met, until we come to definite dogmas? Behold, there immediately present themselves to us, on the threshold as it were, the two priestesses of Christian sanctity, Monogamy and Continence: one modest, in Zechariah the priest; one absolute, in John the forerunner: one appeasing God; one preaching Christ: one proclaiming a perfect priest; one exhibiting "more than a prophet," -him, namely, who has not only preached or personally pointed out, but even baptized Christ.

John was more than a prophet because the other prophets only foretold Christ, while he was an eyewitness, indeed a great thing. And the others prophesied after their birth, while he, still in his mother's womb, recognized Christ and leapt.

But they might say: He is inconstant and speaks from a human spirit; therefore, he removes this: But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Hence he bears witness that he did not speak from a spirit that was human but prophetic. So he shows that he is a prophet and more than a prophet. For he was a prophet, as it says in Luke (1:76): "And you, child, shall be called a prophet of the Most High." Likewise, he raised him above the prophets, saying, I tell you, and more than a prophet. He said this for three reasons:

First, because the office of a prophet is to foretell the future; but he manifested not only the future but also things present, saying: "Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sin of the world" (Jn 1:29). Secondly, he is not only called a prophet but the Baptizer, as above (c. 3); and the precursor, as in Luke (1:76): "You will go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways." Thirdly, as to his manner: for he acted more miraculously than a prophet, because he prophesied from his mother's womb; the others did not, as it says in Luke (1:44): "For behold, when the voice of your greeting sounded on my ears, the infant in my womb leapt for joy."

(interlin.) That is, shall open the hearts of Thy hearers by preaching repentance and baptizing.

There follows: This is he of whom it is written: Behold, I send my angel before your face, who will prepare your way before you. For what is called angelus in Greek is called nuntius (messenger) in Latin. Rightly therefore he who is sent to announce the heavenly judge is called an angel, that he may preserve in his name the dignity which he fulfills in his work. It is indeed a lofty name, but his life is not inferior to his name.

Beloved brothers, let us not say it to our judgment, since all who are designated by the name of priest are called angels, as the prophet attests when he says: "The lips of the priest guard knowledge, and they seek the law from his mouth, because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts." But you too, if you wish, can merit the loftiness of this name. For each one of you, insofar as he is able, insofar as he has received the grace of heavenly inspiration, if he calls back his neighbor from wickedness, if he takes care to exhort him to do good, if he proclaims the eternal kingdom or punishment to one who errs, when he bestows the words of holy proclamation, he surely becomes an angel. And let no one say: "I am not sufficient to admonish, I am not fit to exhort." Offer what you can, lest what you received and kept badly be demanded of you in torments. For he who studied to hide his talent rather than to spend it had received no more than one talent. And we know that in the tabernacle of God not only bowls but also, by the Lord's command, cups were made. By bowls, indeed, abundant teaching is designated; by cups, however, small and limited knowledge. One person, full of the teaching of truth, intoxicates the minds of his hearers. By what he says, therefore, he surely offers a bowl. Another cannot fully express what he perceives, but because he proclaims it in some way, he surely offers a taste through a cup. Therefore, placed in God's tabernacle, that is, in the holy Church, if you cannot minister bowls through the wisdom of teaching, give to your neighbors cups of a good word insofar as you are able according to divine generosity. Insofar as you perceive yourselves to have progressed, draw others along with you; desire to have companions on the way to God. If any of you, brothers, goes to the forum or perhaps to the baths, he invites someone he sees to be idle to come with him. Let that same earthly activity of yours be fitting for you, and if you are heading toward God, take care not to come to him alone. For thus it is written: "Let him who hears say: Come"; so that he who has already received in his heart the voice of heavenly love may also give forth to his neighbors the voice of exhortation. And perhaps he does not have bread to offer alms to the needy; but he who has a tongue has something greater to give. For it is more to restore with the food of the word a mind that will live forever than to satisfy with earthly bread the belly of flesh that will die. Therefore, brothers, do not withhold from your neighbors the alms of the word. I admonish you together with myself that we refrain from idle speech, that we avoid speaking uselessly. Insofar as we are able to restrain our tongue, let not words flow away into the wind, since the Judge says: "Every idle word that men have spoken, they will render an account of it on the day of judgment." An idle word is one that lacks either the usefulness of righteousness or the reason of just necessity. Therefore turn idle conversations to the pursuit of edification: consider how swiftly the times of this life flee away; attend to how strictly the Judge comes. Place him before the eyes of your heart; make him known to the minds of your neighbors; so that insofar as your strength allows, if you do not neglect to proclaim him, you may be worthy to be called angels by him along with John.

(ubi sup.) For the Greek word Angel, is in Latin Nuntius, 'a messenger.' He therefore who came to bear a heavenly message is rightly called an Angel, that he may preserve in his title the dignity which he performs in his office.

John is greater than the other prophets for this reason: the other prophets predicted to John that someone was to come, but John pointed out with his finger that he had indeed come, saying, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world." And he reached not only the rank of a prophet but even to that of Baptist, by baptizing his Lord. This heightened his significance. He thereby fulfilled the prophecy of Malachi in which an angel is foretold. John belonged to the order of the angels not by nature but by the importance of his task. It means he was the messenger who would announce the coming of the Lord.

To add to this great worthiness of John, He brings a passage from Malachias, in which he is spoken of as an Angel. (Mal. 3:1)) We must suppose that John is here called an Angel, not as partaking the Angelic nature, but from the dignity of his office as a forerunner of the Lord.

Then he shows in what respect He is greater, saying, This is he of whom it is written, Behold, I send my angel before thy face.

He shows wherein it is that John is greater than the Prophets, namely, in that he is nigh unto Christ, as he says, I send before thy face, that is, near Thee, as those that walk next to the king's chariot are more illustrious than others, so likewise is John because of his nearness to Christ.

Also the other Prophets were sent to announce Christ's coming, but John to prepare His way, as it follows, who shall make ready thy way before thee;

For Joshua was to introduce the people into the land of promise, not Moses. Now He called him an "angel," on account of the magnitude of the mighty deeds which he was to achieve (which mighty deeds Joshua the son of Nun did, and you yourselves read), and on account of his office of prophet announcing (to wit) the divine will; just as withal the Spirit, speaking in the person of the Father, calls the forerunner of Christ, John, a future "angel," through the prophet: "Behold, I send mine angel before Thy"-that is, Christ's-"face, who shall prepare Thy way before Thee." Nor is it a novel practice to the Holy Spirit to call those "angels" whom God has appointed as ministers of His power.

John was called an angel, both because of his angelic and almost immaterial way of life, and because he announced and proclaimed Christ. He prepared Christ's way by witnessing concerning Him and by baptizing unto repentance, for after repentance comes the forgiveness of sins, which Christ gives. Christ said these things after John's disciples had left so that He would not appear to be flattering him. The prophecy mentioned is of the prophet Malachi (Malachi 3:1).

This is he of whom it is written. Here he proves John's excellence: first, by a text; secondly, from his special privileges (v. 11). He says, therefore: I have said that he is more than a prophet, concerning whom Malachi (3:1) speaks: Behold, I sent my messenger [angel], who shall prepare your way before you... In this text John's outstanding qualities are mentioned: first, because he calls him an angel. For an angel is higher than a prophet, because as a priest is midway between a prophet and the people, so a prophet between angels and priests. But the angel is between God and prophets; hence Zechariah (1:9) says: "The angel who spoke in me." Angel is the name of an office, not of a nature; hence John is called an angel from his office. For there is a difference between an angel and a prophet, because the angels see openly; hence it says below (18:10): "I say to you, that their angels always behold the face of my Father in heaven." Angels always see God's face, but the prophets do not. Hence, as angels always see the face of the Father, so John saw Christ in a special way; and because it was a special way, he says my. He also says, before my face. When a king goes somewhere, many people precede him; but the more familiar ones go before his face. So John is considered more honorable, because he was sent before his face; for the nearer one is, the more honorable he is. Finally, he prepared the way, because he baptized; hence, he says, who shall prepare your way before you.

(Cont. Adv. Leg. et Proph. ii. 5.) The heretic argues from this verse to prove, that since John did not belong to the kingdom of heaven, therefore much less did the other Prophets of that people, than whom John is greater. But these words of the Lord may be understood in two ways. Either the kingdom of heaven is something which we have not yet received, that, namely, of, which He speaks, Come, ye blessed of my Father, receive the kingdom, (Mat. 25:34) because they in it are Angels, therefore the least among them is greater than a righteous man who has a corruptible body. Or if we must understand the kingdom of heaven of the Church, whose children are all the righteous men from the beginning of the world until now, then the Lord speaks this of Himself, who was after John in the time of His birth, but greater in respect of His divine nature and supreme power. According then to the first interpretation it will be pointed, He who is least in the kingdom of heaven, is greater than he; according to the second, He who is less than he, is in the kingdom of heaven greater than he.

"Yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." Now, many would like to interpret this with reference to the Savior, as meaning that the one lesser in age is the greater in worth. However, let us interpret it simply to mean that every saint who is already with God is greater than anyone who remains expectant, as yet in the battle. For it is one thing to possess the crown of victory, another to be still fighting in the ranks. Some conclude that the very newest angel who serves God in heaven is greater than any one, even the best, who dwells on the earth still in expectation.

(Verse 11) Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it. For it does not immediately follow that if others are not greater than him, he is greater than others; but that he has equality with the other saints.

But whoever is lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than him. Many want to understand this about the Savior, that whoever is lesser in time is greater in dignity. But let us understand simply: that every saint, who is already with God, is greater than him who still stands in battle. For it is one thing to possess the crown of victory, another to still fight in the battle. Some want to receive the last angel in heaven ministering to the Lord as better than any first man who dwells on earth.

He is then set before all those that are born in wedlock, and not before Him who was born of the Virgin and the Holy Spirit; yet these words, there has not arisen a greater than John the Baptist, do not imply that John is to be set above the Prophets and Patriarchs and all others, but only makes him equal to the rest; for it does not follow that because others are not greater than him, that therefore he is greater than others.

We understand it simply, that every saint who is already with the Lord is greater than he who yet stands in the battle; for it is one thing to have gained the crown of victory, another to be yet fighting in the field.

"Verily I say unto you, among them that are born of women, there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist."

Now what He said is like this: "woman hath not borne a greater than this man." And His very sentence is indeed sufficient; but if thou art minded to learn from facts also, consider his table, his manner of life, the height of his soul. For he so lived as though he were in heaven: and having got above the necessities of nature, he travelled as it were a new way, spending all his time in hymns and prayers, and holding intercourse with none among men, but with God alone continually. For he did not so much as see any of his fellow-servants, neither was he seen by any one of them; he fed not on milk, he enjoyed not the comfort of bed, or roof, or market, or any other of the things of men; and yet he was at once mild and earnest. Hear, for example, how considerately he reasons with his own disciples, courageously with the people of the Jews, how openly with the king. For this cause He said also, "There hath not risen among them that are born of women a greater than John the Baptist."

But lest the exceeding greatness of His praises should produce a sort of extravagant feeling, the Jews honoring John above Christ; mark how He corrects this also. For as the things which edified His own disciples did harm to the multitudes, they supposing Him an easy kind of person; so again the remedies employed for the multitudes might have proved more mischievous, they deriving from Christ's words a more reverential opinion of John than of Himself.

Wherefore this also, in an unsuspected way, He corrects by saying, "He that is less, in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than he." Less in age, and according to the opinion of the multitude, since they even called Him "a gluttonous man and a winebibber;" and, "Is not this the carpenter's son?" and on every occasion they used to make light of Him.

"What then?" it may be said, "is it by comparison that He is greater than John?" Far from it. For neither when John saith, "He is mightier than I," doth he say it as comparing them; nor Paul, when remembering Moses he writes, "For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses," doth he so write by way of comparison; and He Himself too, in saying, "Behold, a greater than Solomon is here," speaks not as making a comparison.

Or if we should even grant that this was said by Him in the way of comparison, this was done in condescension, because of the weakness of the hearers. For the men really had their gaze very much fixed upon John; and then he was rendered the more illustrious both by his imprisonment, and by his plainness of speech to the king; and it was a great point for the present, that even so much should be received among the multitude. And so too, the Old Testament uses in the same way to correct the souls of the erring, by putting together in a way of comparison things that cannot be compared; as when it saith, "Among the gods there is none like unto Thee, O Lord:" and again, "There is no god like our God."

And moreover His saying, "There hath not risen among them that are born of women a greater than John," suited one contrasting John with Himself, and thus tacitly excepting Himself. For though He too were born of a woman, yet not as John, for He was not a mere man, neither was He born in like manner as a man, but by a strange and wondrous kind of birth.

The kingdom of heaven is Jesus the Christ himself, who exhorts all people to repentance and draws them to himself by love.

And who of all the ancients, who were accounted worthy of the sublime and wonderful gift, was like unto John the Baptist? According to the testimony, which Christ spake concerning him, "He was the greatest of all the Prophets"; and again He said, "Verily I say unto you, among those born of women there is none greater than John the Baptist." Now let us understand and see how and what was the rule and conduct of life of this marvellous man who arrived at such greatness as this, and why he was accounted worthy of all this gift, and with what increase and with how great labours, and after what asceticism, and for how long a time he lived a solitary life away from human intercourse; and when we have seen and have understood these matters of his life, let us consider the greatness of the things which were unto him, and let us understand first of all the things which concern the will, and afterwards the things which concern grace, for until the will shewed its fruits the Spirit gave not its gift. Observe then the life of this marvellous man, who from the time of his childhood was set apart from dwelling in the world, and from intercourse with the children of men; and he was not first of all denied and polluted, and afterwards cleansed and purified, but his youth passed in purity before it arrived at the motions of nature which distinguish between good and evil things. And he was brought up in the wilderness, and he had not in him any worldly care whatsoever; and he did not taste by experience the wickedness of the children of men, and then cast it away, neither was he first moved by lusts and by passions, and afterwards came to peace of the thoughts by the labours of his freewill.

But seeing that righteousness has so great deepness that none can be perfect therein but God only, I suppose that all the saints tried by the keenness of the divine judgment, rank in a fixed order, some lower, some before other. Whence we understand that He that hath none greater than Himself, is greater than all.

As much as to say; What need to recount one by one the praises of John the Baptist; I say verily unto you, Among them that are born of women, &c. He says women, not virgins. If the same word mulier, which denotes a married person, is any where in the Gospels applied to Mary, it should be known that the translator has there used 'mulier' for 'femina;' as in that, Woman, behold thy son! (John 19:26)

As for the fact, then, that "others were not baptized"-they, however, were not companions of Christ, but enemies of the faith, doctors of the law and Pharisees. From which fact is gathered an additional suggestion, that, since the opposers of the Lord refused to be baptized, they who followed the Lord were baptized, and were not like-minded with their own rivals: especially when, if there were any one to whom they clave, the Lord had exalted John above him (by the testimony) saying," Among them who are born of women there is none greater than John the Baptist."

If John is being judged against other people according to being born from a woman, he will be found to be the greatest of them all. He alone was filled with the Holy Spirit inside his mother's womb, so that he "leaped," and his mother prophesied because she partook in this as well. But if John is judged in relation to those who are to partake of the Spirit in the kingdom of heaven, Jesus says, he will be found to be least. Thus Jesus says that John by no means partakes of such great grace as those who will be reborn into immortality after Jesus' resurrection from the dead and that John will experience physical death. At that time, however, the Spirit's abundance toward people will be so great that no one who has partaken of even the least part of it can afterward fall into death.

He declares this with certainty, that there is no one greater than John. But by saying "born of women" He excludes Himself, for Christ was born of a virgin, not of a woman, that is, one who is married. "Notwithstanding, He that is younger is greater than he in the kingdom of heaven." Since He has extolled the praises of John, lest they think that John is greater than He says here more clearly, I am the younger in age and the lesser in your opinion, yet I am greater than he in the kingdom of heaven, that is, in regards to spiritual and heavenly good things. For here I appear less than he, both because his birth preceded Mine and because he appears great to you, but there in the kingdom of heaven I am greater.

Amen, I say to you. Above the Lord commended John on the authority of a prophet [Malachi]; now he intends to commend him in his own words and explains the prophet's text. He does three things: first, he commends him as to the difference of every order and state; secondly, as to the difference between the Law and the Gospel (v. 12); thirdly, as to the difference between the present age and the future (v. 14).

First, he shows that he is outstanding among those on earth; secondly, he shows him lesser among the angels (v. 11b).

He says, therefore: it has been stated that John is an angel, and to put it briefly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist. He was speaking in a proper sense, when he said, has arisen, because all are born children of wrath (Eph 2:3). Therefore, whoever can attain to the state of grace arises. Hence among those born of women. And he speaks precisely, in order that Christ be excluded from this generality, because "woman" suggests defilement, but "female", sex. Hence if son of woman is found anywhere, as in John (19:26): "Woman, behold your son," in that case it denotes sex, not defilement. But how can he say, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater? Is he for this reason greater than all? Jerome says that it does not follow: If a greater has not arisen, therefore he is greater. But Chrysostom says that he is greater than all. Therefore, according to the first explanation, I say that the argument would be valid among angels, where there is order, i.e., that the one than whom none is greater is the greatest; but among men it is not true, because among men there is no order according to nature but only according to grace. Again, if he is said to be greater than all the patriarchs of the Old Testament, it is not incongruous, because he is greater and more outstanding who has been called to a greater office. For Abraham is great among the patriarchs by reason of his faith; but Moses as to the office of prophet, as it says in Deuteronomy (34:10): "There has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses." They had all been the Lord's precursors, but none was as great or more favored. Therefore he was raised to a greater office: "He will be great before the Lord" (Lk 1:15).

Yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. Taking their stand from these words, some have found occasion for calumny; for they want to damn all the fathers of the Old Testament. For if he is greater than the others, it follows that the others are not among those to be saved, because by the kingdom of heaven the present Church is designated. Therefore, if John was not a member of the present Church, he was not among the number of the elect; nor, consequently, were the others.

But this opinion is erroneous, because it is evident that what the Lord says is in praise of John. However, this expression can be explained in three ways: first, so that by kingdom of heaven the order of the blessed is understood and whoever is least among them is greater than one on the way. Therefore the Lord calls the present state a childhood: "When I became a man, I put away the things of a child" (1 Cor 13:11); hence those on the way are called children. And this is true, if one is speaking of the actually greater; for one who has attained is actually greater. But it is otherwise with the virtually greater: for one small herb may be greater in efficacy but smaller in size than others.

It is explained in another way so that the present Church is designated by the kingdom of heaven. Then the lesser is not taken universally but in relation to time: "He that comes after me was made before me" (Jn 1:15). Hence, he that is lesser is greater than he.

It can also be explained a third way. For someone is called greater in two ways: either as to merit, and thus many patriarchs are greater than certain persons in the New Testament, as Augustine says that John's celibacy is not preferred to Abraham's marriage; or by comparing one state to another, as virgins outrank the married, although not every virgin is better than each married person. Hence John's greatness lies on a boundary, because he is greater than wayfarers but less than those who have attained, so that he holds a middle place.

From the days of John the Baptist the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force; meaning that as many as do violence to themselves, and live righteously, and are not guided by their own notions, but have faith in God, all obtain that kingdom.

A hermit was living in a cave in the Thebaid with one well-tested disciple. It was usual for him to teach the disciple during the evening and show him how the soul should progress, and after the address he used to pray and send him away to sleep. Some devout laymen who knew of the hermit's ascetic life happened to visit him. He gave them counsel and they went away. Then he sat down after the evening prayers as usual to instruct the brother. But while he was talking, sleep overcame him. The brother waited for the hermit to wake and end with the usual prayer. But he went on sleeping and the brother went on sitting for a long time and in the end the disciple felt he must go and sleep though he was uneasy about it. So he pulled himself together, and resisted the temptation, and went back to sit by the hermit. A second time he was forced away by the longing for sleep, but he sat down again. This happened seven times, and still he went on resisting it. In the middle of the night the hermit woke up, and found him sitting nearby and said, 'Haven't you gone away yet?' He said, 'No, you did not send me away, abba.' The hermit said, 'Why did you not wake me up?' He answered, 'I did not dare to nudge you for fear of upsetting you.' They both got up and began to say the morning prayers. After that the hermit sent his disciple away. When the hermit was sitting alone, he was shown a vision of a glorious place, with a throne in it, and on the throne seven crowns. He asked the angel who showed him the vision, 'Whose crowns are those?' and he replied, 'They are the crowns of your disciple. God had given him this place and throne because of his goodness and tonight he has been granted these seven crowns.' The hermit was amazed and called his disciple to him with wonder and said, 'Tell me what you did all night.' He answered, 'Alas, abba, I did nothing.' The hermit could see that he was being humble and concealing something, and said, 'Look here, I can't rest until you tell me what you did and thought last night.' But the brother was not aware that he had done anything and could not say a word. Then at last he said to the hermit, 'Indeed, abba, I did nothing, except that seven times I was driven by wandering thoughts to go away and sleep; but you had not sent me away as you usually do, so I did not go.' Then the hermit at once understood that every time he resisted the temptation, God bestowed a crown on him. To the disciple he said nothing, thinking it best for his soul, but he told other directors of souls, to teach us how God can bestow crowns upon us even for resisting little temptations. It is good that a man discipline his whole self for God's sake. As it is written, 'The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by storm' (Matt. 11:12).

(non occ.) That what He had last said should not lead any to suppose that John was an alien from the kingdom of heaven, He corrects this by adding, From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.

But because John admonishes us to great works, saying: "Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance." And again: "He who has two tunics, let him give to him who has none; and he who has food, let him do likewise"; now it is clearly given to understand what Truth means when it says: "From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent seize it." These words of the heavenly pronouncement must be thoroughly examined by us. For it must be asked how the kingdom of heaven can suffer violence. For who inflicts violence upon heaven? And again it must be asked, if the kingdom of heaven can suffer violence, why it endured that same violence from the days of John the Baptist, and not also before. But since the law says: "If anyone does this or that, let him die the death," it is clear to all who read that it struck all sinners with the punishment of its severity, but did not lead them back to life through repentance. But when John the Baptist, preceding the grace of the Redeemer, preaches repentance, so that the sinner who is dead from guilt may live through conversion, surely from the days of John the Baptist the kingdom of heaven suffers violence. But what is the kingdom of heaven, if not the place of the just? For the rewards of the heavenly homeland are owed only to the just, so that the humble, the chaste, the meek, and the merciful may arrive at the joys above. But when someone swollen with pride, or defiled by a sin of the flesh, or inflamed by anger, or impious through cruelty, returns to repentance after his faults and receives eternal life, the sinner enters, as it were, into a place not his own. Therefore from the days of John the Baptist the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent seize it, because he who proclaimed repentance to sinners—what else did he teach but that violence should be done to the kingdom of heaven?

(Hom. in Ev. xx. 14.) By the kingdom of heaven is meant the heavenly throne, whither when sinners defiled with any evil deed return in penitence, and amend themselves, they enter as sinners into the place of another, and take by violence the kingdom of heaven.

As the nature of things demands, the more powerful exert violence, and the weaker are those on whom violence is exerted. We need to consider what is being attacked and what is suffering violence.

The Lord had remarked upon the unbelief of the disciples of John. [Matt. 11:3] He had understood also the opinion of the crowd concerning John's pronouncement. [Matt. 16:14] For he realized the immense danger produced by the scandal of the cross to one's faith. [Matt. 16:22-23] He commanded the apostles to go preferably to the lost sheep of Israel; [Matt. 10:6] it was necessary that they be established in the Kingdom and be preserved in the family, the line of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. Yet all this preaching [to Israel] brought about effect to publicans and sinners. [Matt. 9:11-13] It is from these that believers now come; from these now come apostles; from these now the Kingdom of heaven comes.

John, however, was not believed by the people; the works of Christ did not win authority; the cross was going to become a scandal. Now prophecy is ceased; now the Law is fulfilled; now all preaching is concluded; now the spirit of Elijah is sent ahead in the voice of John. [Matt. 11:14] Christ is preached to some and acknowledged by others; he is born in some and loved by others. His own people spew him out, while strangers receive him; his closest [friends] attack him, while his enemies embrace him. Those who are adopted seek his heritage, while his family rejects him. The children repudiate the Covenant, while the servants acknowledge it. [Rom. 11:7-12] And so it is that the Kingdom of heaven suffers violence. Those who seek to attack it do so because the glory pledged to Israel by the patriarchs, announced by the prophets, and offered by Christ, is now appropriated and seized by the faith of the pagans.

Otherwise; The Lord bade His Apostles go to the lost sheep of Israel, but all their preaching conveyed profit to the publicans and sinners. Therefore the kingdom suffers violence, and the violent take it by force, for the glory of Israel, due to the Fathers, foretold by the Prophets, offered by Christ, is entered and held by force by the might of the Gentiles.

(V.12) But from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

Because John the Baptist was the first who preached repentance to the people, saying, Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand: rightly therefore from that day forth it may be said, that the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For great indeed is the violence, when we who are born of earth, seek an abode in heaven, and obtain by excellence what we have not by nature.

"And from the days of John the Baptist," saith He, "until now, the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force."

And what sort of connexion may this have with what was said before? Much, assuredly, and in full accordance therewith. Yea, by this topic also He proceeds to urge and press them into the faith of Himself; and at the same time likewise, He is speaking in agreement with what had been before said by John. "For if all things are fulfilled even down to John, I am He that should come."

"For all the prophets," saith He, "and the law prophesied until John."

For the prophets would not have ceased, unless I were come. Expect therefore nothing further, neither wait for any one else. For that I am He is manifest both from the prophets ceasing, and from those that every day "take by force" the faith that is in me. For so manifest is it and certain, that many even take it by force. Why, who hath so taken it? tell me. All who approach it with earnestness of mind.

Is it wonder if it knows how to extort the rains of heaven -(prayer) which was once able to procure its fires? Prayer is alone that which vanquishes God.

It would seem that this does not follow the train of thought, but it does. Consider this: Christ, by saying of Himself that He is greater than John, strongly urges them to believe in Him, showing that many are by force acquiring the kingdom of heaven, that is, faith in Him. And there is need of great force, for in order to leave father and mother and to despise one's own life, how much force is needed?

From the days of John the Baptist until now... Here he is commended on the basis of the distinction between the Old Testament and the New Testament, so that John's excellence is marked by the fact that he is the beginning of the New Testament and the end of the Old Testament. Thus he said: "He that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he," which refers to the fact that he is the beginning of the New Testament; but from the days of John the Baptist, i.e., of his preaching, the kingdom of heaven suffers violence.

This is explained in three ways.

First, it is known that in cases of ravishment there is violence and a struggle. Hence it is required that a sinner, if he is able to reach the kingdom of heaven, must climb to spiritual things and struggle a great deal. It is explained in another way. It is known that rapine, properly speaking, means that something is taken by force contrary to the will of the owner. The preaching of salvation was made to the Jews and then to everyone through Christ: "I have not been sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mt 15:24). And although he was sent to them, they did not receive him; yet those to whom he was not sent seized it. Hence he says above: "Many shall come from the east and from the west, and shall recline with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; but the children of the kingdom will be cast into the outer darkness" (Mt 8:12). And below (21:43): "The kingdom of heaven will be taken from you and given to a people producing the fruits of it." Therefore, they have taken it by violence. And this is Hilary's explanation. The third explanation is this: What is taken by violence is snatched quickly; hence Job: "As a torrent which rushes quickly into the valleys": and this is on account of the speed of its movement. And because preaching had so moved men's hearts, the motion seemed swift; therefore, he says, it suffers violence, because they tend toward the kingdom after the manner of someone in a hurry. Hence the Gospel began with him and he is its end.

This should not exclude the prophets who came after John the Baptist, for we read in the Acts of the Apostles that Agabus and Philip's four young unmarried daughters uttered prophecies. But insofar as the law and prophets of the Scriptures looked toward the future, they prophesied about our Lord. So when it is written, "All the prophets and the law up to the time of John have prophesied," the time of Christ is made known as those previous voices had said it would come. Then John showed he had come.

(Verse 13) For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John. Not that they exclude the prophets after John. For we read in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 11:21) that Agabus and the four virgin daughters of Philip prophesied. But what the Law and the prophets, whose writings we read, prophesied, they prophesied about the Lord. Therefore, when it is said, 'All the prophets and the Law prophesied until John,' it indicates the time of Christ, so that John, who they said would come, would show that he has come.

Not that He cuts off all Prophets after John; for we read in the Acts of the Apostles that Agabus prophesied, and also four virgins daughters of Philip; but He means that the Law and the Prophets whom we have written, whatever they have prophesied, they have prophesied of the Lord. That He says, Prophesied until John, shows that this was now the time of Christ's coming; and that whom they had foretold should come, Him John showed to be already come.

"The days of John" and of Jesus are understood not in reference to time but in reference to the state of the soul of the hearer of the divine Scripture. And the word now marks out clearly the days of Jesus, which the psalm points to in this way: "In his days righteousness shall arise, and there will be an abundance of peace till the time when he is taken away." One who has been previously taught comes to the beginning of Jesus' discourses and still makes progress in introductory things by way of that road that appears to be rugged and steep. One thereby "takes by force" the kingdom of heaven, which "suffers violence." The expression "suffers violence" is not to be taken in an active sense but a passive, as if to say "it has been taken." But if the perfect Word, when he receives someone who was awaiting freedom under the law and prophetic schoolmasters and housekeepers, bestows on such a one his father's inheritance freely, then fittingly it is said that "all the prophets and the law prophesied until John."

In short, if this is not so, let the Jews exhibit, subsequently to Christ, any volumes of prophets, visible miracles wrought by any angels, (such as those) which in bygone days the patriarchs saw until the advent of Christ, who is now come; since which event "sealed is vision and prophecy," that is, confirmed. And justly does the evangelist write, "The law and the prophets (were) until John" the Baptist.

And thus, the former gifts of grace being withdrawn, "the law and the prophets were until John," and the fishpool of Bethsaida until the advent of Christ: thereafter it ceased curatively to remove from Israel infirmities of health; since, as the result of their perseverance in their frenzy, the name of the Lord was through them blasphemed, as it is written: "On your account the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles: " for it is from them that the infamy (attached to that name) began, and (was propagated during) the interval from Tiberius to Vespasian.

Yet I must necessarily prescribe you a law, not to stretch out your hand after the old things, not to look backwards: for "the old things are passed away," according to Isaiah; and "a renewing hath been renewed," according to Jeremiah; and "forgetful of former things, we are reaching forward," according to the apostle; and "the law and the prophets (were) until John," according to the Lord.

At all events, in the Gospel they think that those days were definitely appointed for fasts in which "the Bridegroom was taken away; " and that these are now the only legitimate days for Christian fasts, the legal and prophetical antiquities having been abolished: for wherever it suits their wishes, they recognise what is the meaning of" the Law and the prophets until John." Accordingly, (they think) that, with regard to the future, fasting was to be indifferently observed, by the New Discipline, of choice, not of command, according to the times and needs of each individual: that this, withal, had been the observance of the apostles, imposing (as they did) no other yoke of definite fasts to be observed by all generally, nor similarly of Stations either, which (they think) have withal days of their own (the fourth and sixth days of the week), but yet take a wide range according to individual judgment, neither subject to the law of a given precept, nor (to be protracted) beyond the last hour of the day, since even prayers the ninth hour generally concludes, after Peter's example, which is recorded in the Acts.

This, too, follows the same train of thought. For He is saying, I am He that cometh, for all the prophets have been fulfilled. They would not have been fulfilled if I had not come. Therefore, await nothing further.

Hence Christ says: For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John, because all the prophets were for the sake of Christ and began to be fulfilled from the time of John's preaching. Hence Luke (24:44): "Everything written about me must be fulfilled." And this until John. Does this mean that there were no prophets after John? Do we not read below (23:34): "Behold, I sent you prophets, wise men and scribes"? The answer is that a prophet is sent for two purposes: to strengthen faith and to correct morals: "Where there is no prophecy the people cast off restraint" (Pr 29:18). To strengthen faith, as it says in 1 Peter (1:10): "The prophets who prophesied of the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired about this salvation; they inquired what person or time was indicated by the Spirit of Christ within them." Hence prophecy served those two things: faith has now been established, because Christ's promises have been accomplished. But for the correction of morals, prophecy has never ceased nor will ever cease. Therefore John is outstanding, because he is between the Old and the New Law; hence he was sent before his face, as though at the same time as Christ.

He called John Elijah because of Elijah's power and spirit. And since this statement of Jesus was obscure, he left the understanding of it for those capable of perceiving its meaning. But the angel Gabriel also said this about John: "And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah," showing that he was the same as Elijah, even if, as a visible human being, he was other than Elijah.

As the Lord said to the Jews, and if ye are willing, receive it of John the Baptist: This is Elijah who was to come.

So John the Baptist is called Elijah, not in accordance with foolish philosophers and certain heretics who introduce the topic of metempsychosis (transmigration of souls) but because, according to other evidence of the gospel, he came in the spirit and goodness of Elijah and had either the same grace or power of the Holy Spirit. The austerity of their life and firm resolve were equally strong in Elijah and in John. Both lived in the desert. The former girded himself with a belt of skins, and the latter had a similar belt. The former was forced to flee because he accused Ahab and Jezebel of the sin of impiety in their lives. John was beheaded because he accused Herod and Herodias of unlawful marriage. There are those who think therefore that John is called Elijah because, just as Elijah would lead the way in the second coming of our Savior (according to Malachi) and would announce that the Judge was coming, so John acted at the first coming and because each was a messenger either of the first or second coming of our Lord.

(Verse 14, 15.) And if you want to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come. He who has ears to hear, let him hear. This which was said, if you want to receive it, he is Elijah, signifies a mystical understanding and requires intelligence, as the following words of the Lord demonstrate, saying: He who has ears to hear, let him hear. For if the meaning were clear and the sentiment evident, why would it be necessary for us to be prepared for its understanding? Therefore, John is called Elijah, not according to foolish philosophers and certain heretics, who introduce reincarnation, but because, as another testimony of the Gospel states, he came in the spirit and power of Elijah, he had the same grace or measure of the Holy Spirit. But the austerity of life and the firmness of mind of Elijah and John are equal. For Elijah lived in the desert, and so did John: Elijah wore a leather belt, and so did John. Elijah, because he accused King Ahab and Jezebel of impiety, was forced to flee (3 Kings 19); John, because he accused Herod and Herodias of unlawful marriage, was beheaded. There are those who think that John is called Elijah because just as Elijah is said to precede the second coming of the Savior according to Malachi, and announce the coming Judge, so did John in the first coming; and both are messengers of either the first coming of the Lord, or the second.

John then is said to be Elias, not according to the foolish philosophers, and certain heretics who bring forward their metempsychosis, or passing of the soul from one body to another; but because (as it is in another passage of the Gospel) he came in the spirit and power of Elias, and had the same grace and measure of the Holy Spirit. But in austerity of life, and fortitude of spirit, Elias and John were alike; they both dwelt in the desert, both were girded with a girdle of skins; because he reproved Ahab and Jezebel for their wickedness, Elias was compelled to fly; because he condemned the unlawful union of Herod and Herodias, John is beheaded.

That He says, This is Elias, is figurative, and needs to be explained, as what follows, shews; He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Then He states also another infallible sign, saying, "If ye will receive it, he is Elias, which was for to come." For "I will send you," it is said, "Elias the Tishbite, who shall turn the heart of the father to the children." This man then is Elias, if ye attend exactly, saith He. For "I will send," saith He, "my messenger before Thy face."

And well hath He said, "If ye will receive it," to show the absence of force. For I do not constrain, saith He. And this He said, as requiring a candid mind, and showing that John is Elias, and Elias John. For both of them received one ministry, and both of them became forerunners. Wherefore neither did He simply say, "This is Elias," but, "If ye are willing to receive it, this is he," that is, if with a candid mind ye give heed to what is going on. And He did not stop even at this, but to the words, "This is Elias, which was for to come," He added, to show that understanding is needed, "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

Now He used so many dark sayings, to stir them up to inquiry. And if not even so were they awakened, much more, had all been plain and clear. For this surely no man could say, that they dared not ask Him, and that He was difficult of approach. For they that were asking him questions, and tempting Him about common matters, and whose mouths were stopped a thousand times, yet they did not withdraw from Him; how should they but have inquired of Him, and besought Him touching the indispensable things, had they indeed been desirous to learn? For if concerning the matters of the law they asked, "Which is the first commandment," and all such questions, although there was of course no need of His telling them that; how should they but ask the meaning of what He Himself said, for which also He was bound to give account in His answers? And especially when it was He Himself that was encouraging and drawing them on to do this. For by saying, "The violent take it by force," He stirs them up to earnestness of mind; and by saying, "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear," He doth just the same thing.

As much as to say, Whoso has ears of the heart to hear, that is, to understand, let him understand; for He did not say that John was Elias in person, but in the Spirit.

I apprehend that heretics of this school seize with especial avidity the example of Elias, whom they assume to have been so reproduced in John (the Baptist) as to make our Lord's statement sponsor for their theory of transmigration, when He said, "Elias is come already, and they knew him not; " and again, in another passage, "And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come." Well, then, was it really in a Pythagorean sense that the Jews approached John with the inquiry, "Art thou Elias? " and not rather in the sense of the divine prediction, "Behold, I will send you Elijah" the Tisbite? The fact, however, is, that their metempsychosis, or transmigration theory, signifies the recall of the soul which had died long before, and its return to some other body.

Jesus is in effect saying: Just as Elijah will come toward the end of this present age preaching about my imminent appearance from heaven, in the same way this one has spread the good news of my coming, bringing an end to the old things. My coming is something new, a type of the state of things that is about to occur.

If you are willing, He says, to accept it, that is, if you judge the matter with a good disposition of mind, and not spitefully, he is the one whom the prophet Malachi called Elijah who was to come (Malachi 4:5. "And, behold, I will send to you Elijah the Tishbite before the great and glorious day of the Lord comes"). For both the Forerunner and Elijah have the same ministry. The one was the Forerunner of the first coming, while Elijah will be the forerunner of the second coming. Then, showing that it is an enigma that John is Elijah, and requires wisdom to understand it, He says:

And if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. Here he shows John's greatness as far as the distinction between present and future is concerned. For Elijah was the Lord's precursor; hence Malachi (4:5): "Behold, I will send you Elijah, the prophet...," and John is Elijah. But what is the Lord saying? For when John was asked if he was Elijah, he said that he was not. But this refutes a heresy which posited transmigration of souls, namely, that the soul went from one body and entered another body; therefore Elijah's soul had entered John, so they said. But this opinion is false, because he denied that he was Elijah. But Christ said that John was Elijah on account of three similarities: first, because, as one angel is said to be similar to another angel, because they are equal in office, so Elijah and John were equal in office, because both were precursors: "He will go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways" (Lk 1:76). Also as to manner of life, because he led an austere life (1 Kg 19:6). Again, as to persecution, because as he was persecuted by Jezebel, so John by Herod. Hence if you are willing to accept it in the sense in which it should be taken, he is Elijah.

Thus urging them to ask and to learn.

And so that they might understand that he was speaking in a mystical way, he adds, he who has ears to hear, let him hear, i.e., he that has ears spiritually, let him hear and understand.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Peter therefore shall enter, who received the keys. Yet not alone: for he will also introduce me, if he shall have willed it, and will exclude another whom perhaps he shall have willed, in the knowledge and power given to him from above.

And what are these keys? The power of opening and closing, and the discernment between those to be excluded and those to be admitted. And the treasures are not in the serpent, but in Christ. And therefore the serpent could not give the knowledge which he did not have; but he who had it, gave it. Nor indeed could the serpent have the power which he did not receive; but he who received it, had it. Christ gave, Peter received, and was neither puffed up by the knowledge, nor to be cast down on account of the power. Why? Because in neither does he exalt himself against the knowledge of God, who desired none of these things apart from the knowledge of God.

Christ instituted orders by first giving the power of binding and loosing the sins of the human race and the power of confecting the Sacrament of the altar.

To all those established in the sacerdotal order, and to them alone, is given the power of the twofold key, namely the key of knowledge for discerning, and the key which is the power of binding and loosing, for judging and bestowing the benefit of absolution.

Because indeed, in order to avoid confusion, not just anyone is set over anyone else in the Church Militant, since the ecclesiastical hierarchy itself ought to be ordered according to judicial power: therefore this power of binding and loosing was granted first to one first and supreme priest, upon whom universal power was conferred as upon the supreme head; and then according to particular Churches it is divided into parts, such that it descends first to bishops and then to priests from one head. Therefore, although every priest has the order and the key, nevertheless the use of the key extends only to those who are ordinarily subject to him, unless it is committed to him by one who has ordinary jurisdiction. Since indeed that jurisdiction resides principally in the supreme head, and then in the bishop, and lastly in the parish priest, it can indeed be committed to another by any of these—sufficiently indeed by the lowest, more fully by the middle, and most of all by the supreme.

As the Assyrians devastated the Jews, so did the Saracens occupy the Churches of Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Constantinople, and all the way to Sicily. As the Ten Tribes fell and broke away from the house of David, so did these Churches fall and break away from Peter to whom it had been said: "I will give thee the keys of the kingdom," and they succumbed to the wolves.

To that which is objected, that the same word was said to the Apostles which had previously been said to Peter — for in Matthew 16 it is said to Peter, I will give to you the keys, and whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, etc. — it must be said that it was said far differently to them and to Peter. For to Peter it was said separately and singularly, because in him the fullness of power was to be placed principally and singularly: but to the others it was said collectively; Whatsoever you shall bind, etc., because they were called "into a share of the solicitude." Whence although they had a similar power, they did not however have an equal one.

For Christ is a rock which is never disturbed or worn away. Therefore Peter gladly received his name from Christ to signify the established and unshaken faith of the church.… The devil is the gateway of death who always hastens to stir up against the holy church calamities and temptations and persecutions. But the faith of the apostle, which was founded upon the rock of Christ, abides always unconquered and unshaken. And the very keys of the kingdom of the heavens have been handed down so that one whom he has bound on earth has been bound in heaven, and one whom he has set free on earth he has also set free in heaven.

But the other image of the keys has an exactitude that has hardly been exactly noticed. The keys have been conspicuous enough in the art and heraldry of Christendom; but not every one has noted the peculiar aptness of the allegory. We have now reached the point in history where something must be said of the first appearance and activities of the Church in the Roman Empire; and for that brief description nothing could be more perfect than that ancient metaphor. The Early Christian was very precisely a person carrying about a key, or what he said was a key. The whole Christian movement consisted in claiming to possess that key. It was not merely a vague forward movement, which might be better represented by a battering-ram. It was not something that swept along with it similar and dissimilar things, as does a modern social movement. As we shall see in a moment, it rather definitely refused to do so. It definitely asserted that there was a key and that it possessed that key and that no other key was like it; in that sense it was as narrow as you please. Only it happened to be the key that could unlock the prison of the whole world; and let in the white daylight of escape.

The creed was like a key in three respects; which can be most conveniently summed up under this symbol. First, a key is above all things a thing with a shape. It is a thing that depends entirely upon keeping its shape. The Christian creed is above all things the philosophy of shapes and the enemy of shapelessness. That is where it differs from all that formless infinity, Manichean or Buddhist, which makes a sort of pool of night in the dark heart of Asia; the ideal of uncreating all the creatures. That is where it differs also from the analogous vagueness of mere evolutionism; the idea of creatures constantly losing their shape. A man told that his solitary latchkey had been melted down with a million others into a Buddhistic unity would be annoyed. But a man told that his key was gradually growing and sprouting in his pocket, and branching into new wards or complications, would not be more gratified.

Second, the shape of a key is in itself a rather fantastic shape. A savage who did not know it was a key would have the greatest difficulty in guessing what it could possibly be. And it is fantastic because it is in a sense arbitrary. A key is not a matter of abstractions; in that sense a key is not a matter of argument. It either fits the lock or it does not. It is useless for men to stand disputing over it, considered by itself; or reconstructing it on pure principles of geometry or decorative art. It is senseless for a man to say he would like a simpler key; it would be far more sensible to do his best with a crowbar. And thirdly, as the key is necessarily a thing with a pattern, so this was one having in some ways a rather elaborate pattern. When people complain of the religion being so early complicated with theology and things of the kind, they forget that the world had not only got into a hole, but had got into a whole maze of holes and corners. The problem itself was a complicated problem; it did not in the ordinary sense merely involve anything so simple as sin. It was also full of secrets, of unexplored and unfathomable fallacies, of unconscious mental diseases, of dangers in all directions. If the faith had faced the world only with the platitudes about peace and simplicity some moralists would confine it to, it would not have had the faintest effect on that luxurious and labyrinthine lunatic asylum. What it did do we must now roughly describe; it is enough to say here that there was undoubtedly much about the key that seemed complex; indeed there was only one thing about it that was simple. It opened the door.

But even with that we return to the more specially Christian symbol in the same tradition; the perfect pattern of the keys. This is a historical and not a theological outline, and it is not my duty here to defend in detail that theology, but merely to point out that it could not even be justified in design without being justified in detail--like a key. Beyond the broad suggestion of this chapter I attempt no apologetic about why the creed should be accepted. But in answer to the historical query of why it was accepted, and is accepted, I answer for millions of others in my reply; because it fits the lock; because it is like life. It is one among many stories; only it happens to be a true story. It is one among many philosophies; only it happens to be the truth. We accept it; and the ground is solid under our feet and the road is open before us. It does not imprison us in a dream of destiny or a consciousness of the universal delusion. It opens to us not only incredible heavens, but what seems to some an equally incredible earth, and makes it credible. This is the sort of truth that is hard to explain because it is a fact; but it is a fact to which we can call witnesses. We are Christians and Catholics not because we worship a key, but because we have passed a door; and felt the wind that is the trumpet of liberty blow over the land of the living.

(interlin.) It follows, And whatsoever thou shalt bind; that is, whomsoever thou shalt judge unworthy of forgiveness while he lives, shall be judged unworthy with God; and whatsoever thou shalt loose, that is, whomsoever thou shalt judge worthy to be forgiven while he lives, shall obtain forgiveness of his sins from God.

(ap. Anselm.) This power was committed specially to Peter, that we might thereby be invited to unity. For He therefore appointed him the head of the Apostles, that the Church might have one principal Vicar of Christ, to whom the different members of the Church should have recourse, if ever they should have dissensions among them. But if there were many heads in the Church, the bond of unity would be broken. Some say that the words upon earth denote that power was not given to men to bind and loose the dead, but the living; for he who should loose the dead would do this not upon earth, but after the earth.

(Verse 19.) And I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. The bishops and priests who do not understand this passage, arrogantly assume to themselves something of the Pharisees, either to condemn the innocent or to release the guilty; whereas with God, it is not the judgment of priests, but the life of the accused that is sought. In Leviticus (Chapter 14), we read about leprosy, where they are commanded to show themselves to the priests, and if they have leprosy, then they become unclean by the priest: not that priests make lepers and unclean; but so that they have knowledge of who is leprous and who is not, and they can discern who is clean and who is unclean. So just as the priest there makes the leper clean or unclean, so here the bishop and priest bind or loose, not those who are innocent or guilty; but according to their office, when they hear the varieties of sins, they know who should be bound and who should be loosed.

Bishops and Presbyters; not understanding this passage, assume to themselves something of the lofty pretensions of the Pharisees, and suppose that they may either condemn the innocent, or absolve the guilty; whereas what will be enquired into before the Lord will be not the sentence of the Priests, but the life of him that is being judged. We read in Leviticus of the lepers, how they are commanded to show themselves to the Priests, and if they have the leprosy, then they are made unclean by the Priest; not that the Priest makes them leprous and unclean, but that the Priest has knowledge of what is leprosy and what is not leprosy, and can discern who is clean, and who is unclean. In the same way then as there the Priest makes the leper unclean, here the Bishop or Presbyter binds or looses not those who are without sin, or guilt, but in discharge of his function when he has heard the varieties of their sins, he knows who is to be bound, and who loosed.

Then He mentions also another honor. "And I also will give thee the keys of the heavens." But what is this, "And I also will give thee?" "As the Father hath given thee to know me, so will I also give thee."

And He said not, "I will entreat the Father" (although the manifestation of His authority was great, and the largeness of the gift unspeakable), but, "I will give thee." What dost Thou give? tell me. "The keys of the heavens, that whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in Heaven." How then is it not "His to give to sit on His right hand, and on His left," when He saith, "I will give thee"?

Seest thou how He, His own self, leads Peter on to high thoughts of Him, and reveals Himself, and implies that He is Son of God by these two promises? For those things which are peculiar to God alone, (both to absolve sins, and to make the church incapable of overthrow in such assailing waves, and to exhibit a man that is a fisher more solid than any rock, while all the world is at war with him), these He promises Himself to give; as the Father, speaking to Jeremiah, said, He would make him as "a brazen pillar, and as a wall;" but him to one nation only, this man in every part of the world.

I would fain inquire then of those who desire to lessen the dignity of the Son, which manner of gifts were greater, those which the Father gave to Peter, or those which the Son gave him? For the Father gave to Peter the revelation of the Son; but the Son gave him to sow that of the Father and that of Himself in every part of the world; and to a mortal man He entrusted the authority over all things in Heaven, giving him the keys; who extended the church to every part of the world, and declared it to be stronger than heaven. "For heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away." How then is He less, who hath given such gifts, hath effected such things?

And these things I say, not dividing the works of Father and Son ("for all things are made by Him, and without Him was nothing made which was made"): but bridling the shameless tongue of them that dare so to speak.

But see, throughout all, His authority: "I say unto thee, Thou art Peter; I will build the Church; I will give thee the keys of Heaven."

See how great power has that rock upon which the Church is built, that its sentences are to continue firm as though God gave sentence by it.

Let him then be without blame who binds or looses another, that he may be found worthy to bind or loose in heaven. Moreover, to him who shall be able by his virtues to shut the gates of hell, are given in reward the keys of the kingdom of heaven. For every kind of virtue when any has begun to practise it, as it were opens itself before Him, the Lord, namely, opening it through His grace, so that the same virtue is found to be both the gate, and the key of the gate. But it may be that each virtue is itself the kingdom of heaven.

For as with a zeal beyond the others he had confessed the King of heaven, he is deservedly entrusted more than the others with the keys of the heavenly kingdom, that it might be clear to all, that without that confession and faith none ought to enter the kingdom of heaven. By the keys of the kingdom He means discernment and power; power, by which he binds and looses, discernment, by which he separates the worthy from the unworthy.

But this power of binding and loosing, though it seems given by the Lord to Peter alone, is indeed given also to the other Apostles, and is even now in the^ Bishops and Presbyters in every Church. (vid. Matt. 18:18.) But Peter received in a special manner the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and a supremacy of judicial power, that all the faithful throughout the world might understand that all who in any manner separate themselves from the unity of the faith, or from communion with him, such should neither be able to be loosed from the bonds of sin, nor to enter the gate of the heavenly kingdom.

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

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in the heavens; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in the heavens. He spoke as God, with authority, "I will give unto thee." For as the Father gave you the revelation, so I give you the keys. By "keys" understand that which binds or looses transgressions, namely, penance or absolution; for those who, like Peter, have been deemed worthy of the grace of the episcopate, have the authority to absolve or to bind. Even though the words "I will give unto thee" were spoken to Peter alone, yet they were given to all the apostles. Why? Because He said, "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted." Also, the words "I will give" indicate a future time, namely, after the Resurrection. "The heavens" also mean the virtues, and the keys to the heavens are labors. For by laboring we enter into each of the virtues as if by means of keys that are used to open. If I do not labor but only know the good, I possess only the key of knowledge but remain outside. That man is bound in the heavens, that is, in the virtues, who does not walk in them, but he who is diligent in acquiring virtues is loosed in them. Therefore let us not have sins, so that we may not be bound by the chains of our own sins.

And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Here the second gift is set forth which Christ gave to Peter according to his humanity. For he founded the Church on earth, and established Peter as his vicar, so that he might introduce men into heaven; Heb. 10:19: having confidence in the entering into the holies by the blood of Christ. Hence Christ established Peter as his vicar, so that he might introduce men into heaven; hence he gave him that ministry, hence he gave him the keys. For a key introduces: hence Peter has the ministry of introducing. And he does two things. First, he entrusts the keys; second, he teaches their use: and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven etc. But let us see what the keys are. When a house is locked, it prevents entrance; but a key removes the impediment. The kingdom of heaven had an impediment, but not on its own part; Apoc. 4:1: I saw, and behold a door was opened; but the impediment was on our part, namely sin, because there shall not enter into it any thing defiled. Christ removed these impediments through his passion, because he washed us from our sins in his own blood, Apoc. 1:5. And he communicated this so that through the ministry sins might be taken away, which is accomplished through the power of Christ's blood: hence the sacraments have their power from the power of the passion of Christ. Hence I will give to you the ministry, etc. Isa. 22:22: I will lay upon thee the key of David. But he says I will give to thee; for they were not yet forged; but a thing cannot be given before it exists. For these were to be forged in the passion; hence in the passion was their efficacy. Hence here he promised, but after the passion he gave, when he said: feed my sheep. But why does he say keys? Because to absolve is to remove an obstacle. For there are two, because two things are required: power and knowledge. But what is this? Are there not some priests who do not have knowledge? Understand that they have knowledge, because no one has the key of knowledge except a priest. Knowledge is not spoken of here as the habit of the intellect etc., but it is called the authority of discerning. Hence there is some judge who does not have knowledge in the first way, and yet has knowledge in the second way, because he has authority; but someone has knowledge in the first way, and not in the second way, because he does not have authority. Hence knowledge here means the authority of discerning, and every priest has this so as to discern in absolving. Consequently he sets forth the use of the keys: whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven. But it seems that this is set forth improperly, because the use of a key is not to bind, but to open. I say that this use of the keys is fitting. For heaven itself is open; Apoc. 4:1: I saw a door opened. Hence it is not necessary that it be opened; but one who is bound and ought to enter, must be loosed. But here certain errors must be avoided. The first is touched upon in the Gloss, because some have usurped the claim that they could absolve all whom they wished, and introduce them into the kingdom of heaven. But this cannot stand, because it belongs to God alone to change wills. Another error is that the priest does not bind, but shows that one is absolved. But this derogates from the power of the sacrament, since the sacraments of the new law effect what they signify; but the sacraments of the old law did not. Hence if it effected nothing, it would not be a sacrament of the new law. Third, some say that in sin there are three things: guilt, liability, and punishment. From two of these a man is absolved by himself through contrition; but when a man has been absolved from these, there remains an obligation to temporal punishment, which a man cannot by himself remove and avoid; therefore the keys are given, which diminish something of this punishment, and bind with regard to some punishment. However, it seems to me that this is not well said, because the sacrament of the new law gives grace, but grace is not directed against punishment, but against guilt. Hence I say that it is so in this sacrament of confession as in the sacrament of Baptism, which has a spiritual instrumental power, by which it cleanses from guilt. Hence Augustine says: what is the power of water, that it washes the flesh and takes away guilt? So I say that in the priest there is a certain spiritual instrumental power, from which he is called a minister, and so he operates ministerially for the remission of sins, just as the water of Baptism does. But here a difficulty arises, because now only infants come to Baptism: and if an adult approaches, he either comes insincerely or sincerely: he comes insincerely when without a renewal of the mind, and then guilt is not remitted; he comes sincerely when with the purpose of confession, hence grace is required, or rather the purpose of conversion, and this is from grace. But grace takes away guilt. Hence in the sacrament of Baptism, an adult who comes, if he prepares himself, receives the remission of guilt. So in the sacrament of penance, to which only adults come, one is not contrite unless he has the purpose of submitting himself to the discernment and judgment of the priest. If he is not contrite, he does not obtain the effect, just as neither in Baptism. But it can happen that someone approaches who is not totally contrite, who by the power of grace conferred in the perfected sacrament is made contrite; therefore it should be understood: whatsoever thou shalt loose, i.e., if you apply the ministry of absolution. And he says whatsoever, because not only guilt, but punishment. It shall be loosed in heaven, i.e., it shall be held as absolved in heaven, just as it is with Baptism: hence the priest ought to say, I absolve thee, just as I baptize thee. But someone can ask how he binds. It should be known that the priest is a minister of God, and the action of the minister depends upon the action of the lord: hence in the way that the Lord binds and looses, so the priest does ministerially. God looses by infusing grace; he binds by not infusing it: so the priest looses by the sacrament, administering the sacrament; he binds by not administering it. In another way it is said that by the heavens the present Church is designated; hence whatsoever thou shalt bind, by excommunication, or loose, shall be loosed or bound, as regards the administration of the sacraments of the Church. Hence they hold that this administration, this binding and absolution, is upon earth, so that it does not extend to the dead. But this is disproved, because it extends not only to the living, but also to the dead: hence if it is referred to both, the sense is: whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, I say then existing upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven. But there is another question, because elsewhere it is found, John 20:23: whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; but here he says this only to Peter. It must be said that he gave it immediately to Peter; but the others receive from Peter; therefore, lest these things should be thought to have been said only to Peter, he says: whose sins you shall forgive etc. And for this reason the Pope, who is in the place of Saint Peter, has plenary power, but the others receive from him.