Mark § 46

(ubi sup.) And the Evangelist adds the cause of his grief, saying, For he had great possessions. The feelings of those who have little and those who have much are not the same, for the increase of acquired wealth lights up a greater flame of covetousness. There follows: And Jesus looked round about, and said unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jesus responded and said: Amen I say to you: There is no one who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or fields for my sake, and for the sake of the Gospel, who will not receive a hundred times as much now in this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and fields, with persecutions, and in the age to come, eternal life. Some, using this kind of statement as an occasion, propagate the Jewish fable of a thousand-year reign after the resurrection of the just, during which all that we have given up for God's sake will be repaid to us a hundredfold, and eternal life will be granted besides. And the foolish do not see that, even if in other matters the promise is worthy, the remuneration of wives a hundred times over, according to other evangelists, would appear scandalous, especially since the Lord Himself testifies that in the resurrection there will be no marrying, and asserts that those things given up for His sake will be received in this present time with persecutions. But those Chiliasists confirm that all those persecutions, like other contrary things, are wholly absent from their millennium. Therefore, this is the sense: Whoever has left carnal things for the Gospel of Christ will receive spiritual goods, which, in their worth and merit, will be as if a hundredfold number were compared to a small number. Because clearly, from the brothers and associates of his purpose, who are bound to him in spiritual glue, he will receive much greater affection even in this life. Read the Acts of the Apostles, where it says that the heart and soul of the multitude of believers were one, and all things were common among them, and there was no needy person among them (Acts 4), who had left their own for the Lord's sake. Of whom also the Apostle says, "As having nothing, and yet possessing everything" (2 Cor. 6). Certainly, what he says, "He will receive a hundred times as much now in this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and fields with persecutions" (Mark 10), could be understood as a deeper signification. For the number one hundred, transferred from the left to the right, although it seems to hold the same figure in the bending of the fingers which ten had in the left, it greatly surpasses in magnitude. Because indeed, those who despise temporal things for the kingdom of God, even in this life full of persecutions, taste the joy of the same kingdom with certain faith, and in the expectation of the heavenly homeland (which is rightly signified in the right hand), they enjoy the most sincere love of all the elect equally. But because many do not complete the pursuit of virtues with the same intention of piety with which they begin, but either cool down after receiving the love of virtues or completely relapse into the mire of crimes, a terrifying sentence is immediately added.

(ubi sup.) But while Peter asks only concerning the disciples, our Lord makes a general answer; wherefore it goes on: Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands. But in saying this, He does not mean that we should leave our fathers, without helping them, or that we should separate ourselves from our wives; but He instructs us to prefer the glory of God to the things of this world.

"And Jesus answering said, Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall leave what is his own, parents, and children, and wealth, for My sake and the Gospel's, shall receive an hundredfold." But let neither this trouble you, nor the still harder saying delivered in another place in the words, "Whoso hateth not father, and mother, and children, and his own life besides, cannot be My disciple." For the God of peace, who also exhorts to love enemies, does not introduce hatred and dissolution from those that are dearest. But if we are to love our enemies, it is in accordance with right reason that, ascending from them, we should love also those nearest in kindred. Or if we are to hate our blood-relations, deduction teaches us that much more are we to spurn from us our enemies. So that the reasonings would be shown to destroy one another. But they do not destroy each other, nor are they near doing so. For from the same feeling and disposition, and on the ground of the same rule, one loving his enemy may hate his father, in as much as he neither takes vengeance on an enemy, nor reverences a father more than Christ. For by the one word he extirpates hatred and injury, and by the other shamefacedness towards one's relations, if it is detrimental to salvation. If then one's father, or son, or brother, be godless, and become a hindrance to faith and an impediment to the higher life, let him not be friends or agree with him, but on account of the spiritual enmity, let him dissolve the fleshly relationship.

But how can they follow Christ, who are held back by the chain of their wealth? Or how can they seek heaven, and climb to sublime and lofty heights, who are weighed down by earthly desires? They think that they possess, when they are rather possessed; as slaves of their profit, and not lords with respect to their own money, but rather the bond-slaves of their money. These times and these men are indicated by the apostle, when he says, "But they that will be rich, fall into temptation, and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and in perdition. For the root of all evil is the love of money, which, while some have coveted, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." But with what rewards does the Lord invite us to contempt of worldly wealth? With what compensations does He atone for the small and trifling losses of this present time? "There is no man," saith He, "that leaves house, or land, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, but he shall receive seven fold even in this time, but in the world to come life everlasting." If we know these things, and have found them out from the truth of the Lord who promises, not only is not loss of this kind to be feared, but even to be desired; as the Lord Himself again announces and warns us, "Blessed are ye when men shall persecute you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall cast you out, and shall speak of your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake! Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy; for, behold, your reward is great in heaven."

(Hom. in Matt. 64) But it seems to me that by these words He intended covertly to proclaim that there were to be persecutions, as it would come to pass that many fathers would allure their sons to impiety, and many wives their husbands. Again He delays not to say, for my name's sake and the Gospel's, as Mark says, or for the kingdom of God, as Luke says; the name of Christ is the power of the Gospel, and of His kingdom; for the Gospel is received in the name of Jesus Christ, and the kingdom is made known, and comes by His name.

" If you wish to be the Lord's disciple, it is necessary you "take your cross, and follow the Lord: " your cross; that is, your own straits and tortures, or your body only, which is after the manner of a cross. Parents, wives, children, will have to be left behind, for God's sake. Do you hesitate about arts, and trades, and about professions likewise, for the sake of children and parents? Even there was it demonstrated to us, that both "dear pledges," and handicrafts, and trades, are to be quite left behind for the Lord's sake; while James and John, called by the Lord, do leave quite behind both father and ship; while Matthew is roused up from the toll-booth; while even burying a father was too tardy a business for faith.

Everyone who leaves wife or mother — He says this not so that we would leave our parents helpless or separate from our wives, but teaches us to prefer pleasing God above all things of the flesh. Since from the preaching of the Gospel war was to be kindled among people, so that children would have to renounce their fathers, the Lord says: whoever leaves for the sake of the Gospel fleshly kinship and in general all things of the flesh, that one will receive all this a hundredfold in this age, and in the age to come, eternal life.

Some, however, taking occasion from this saying, in which it is announced that he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, teach that Jewish fable of a thousand years after the resurrection of the just, when all that we have left for the Lord's sake is to be restored with manifold usury, besides which we are to receive the crown of everlasting life. These persons do not perceive, that although the promise in other respects be honourable, yet in the hundred wives, which the other Evangelists mention, its foulness is made manifest: particularly when the Lord testifies that there shall be no marriage in the resurrection, and asserts that those things which are put away from us for His sake are to be received again in this life with persecutions, which, as they affirm, will not take place in their thousand yearss.

(ubi sup.) This which is here said, shall receive an hundredfold, may be understood in a higher sense. For the number a hundred which is reckoned by changing from the left to the right hand, although it has the same appearance in the bending of the fingers as the ten had on the left, nevertheless is increased to a much greater quantity. This means, that all who have despised temporal things for the sake of the kingdom of heaven through undoubting faith, taste the joy of the same kingdom in this life which is full of persecutions, and in the expectation of the heavenly country, which is signified by the right hand, have a share in the happiness of all the elect.

For he who for the sake of Christ's name distances himself from his particular beloved father or mother or child, and gives himself over to the purest love of all who serve Christ, will receive a hundred times the measure of brothers and kinsfolk. Instead of but one he will begin to have so many fathers and brothers bound to him by a still more fervent and admirable affection. That this is so you can prove by your own experience, since you have each left but one father and mother and home, and as you have done so you have gained without any effort or care countless fathers and mothers and brothers, as well as houses and lands and most faithful servants, in any part of the world to which you go, who receive you as their own family, and welcome, and respect, and take care of you with the utmost attention.

(Cat. in Marc. Oxon.) This hundredfold reward therefore must be in participation, not in possession, for the Lord fulfilled this to them not carnally, but spiritually.

Therefore, will he not also receive a hundred times more wives? Yes — although the accursed Julian mocked this. For tell me, what benefit does a wife bring to her husband's household? In general, she cares for food and clothing for her husband and in this regard fully provides for him. Now look at how it was with the apostles. How many women cared for providing them with clothing and food and served them, so that they themselves had no concern for anything except the word and teaching! Likewise, the apostles had many fathers and mothers, as all those who loved them and cared for them heartily were such to them. Peter left his one house, but later had as his own all the houses of his disciples. Even now he has throughout the whole earth splendid houses — churches in his name. And what is still more important is that the saints inherited all this in exile, that is, while being persecuted for the faith of Christ, and in cruel sufferings, but their sufferings were not a disgrace to them.

For a wife is busied in a house about her husband's food and raiment. See also how this is the case with the Apostles; for many women busied themselves about their food and their clothing, and ministered unto them. In like manner the Apostles had many fathers and mothers, that is, persons who loved them; as Peter, for instance, leaving one house, had afterwards the houses of all the disciples. And what is more wonderful, they are to be persecuted and oppressed, for it is with persecutions that the Saints are to possess all things.

"But many that are first shall be last, and the last first. For example, see Judas, who turned from an apostle into an apostate, and you will say that many that are first shall be last; see the thief on the cross, who became a confessor, and on the same day he was crucified for his sins, rejoicing in paradise with Christ by the grace of faith, and you will say that the last shall be first. But also every day we see many in lay attire excelling in the great merits of life, and others who, from their earliest age, have been fervent in spiritual zeal, yet at the end become sluggish in idleness, growing weak, and finishing in the flesh what they began in the spirit with lazy foolishness.

But because all do not accomplish a virtuous course of life with the same ardour as they began it, it is presently added, But many that are first shall be last, and the last first; for we daily see many persons who, remaining in a lay habit, are eminent for their meritorious life; but others, who from their youth have been ardent in a spiritual profession, at last wither away in the sloth of ease, and with a lazy folly finish in the flesh, what they had begun in the Spirit.

"The first shall be last, and the last first." This is fruitful in meaning and exposition, but does not demand investigation at present; for it refers not only to the wealthy alone, but plainly to all men, who have once surrendered themselves to faith.

For those who appeared last in the present age, on account of the sorrows and persecutions they endured, will be first in the age to come for their steadfast hope in God. The Pharisees, who were first, became last, and those who left everything and followed Christ became first.

But many that are first shall be last, and the last first. For the Pharisees who were first became the last; but those who left all and followed Christ were last in this world through tribulation and persecutions, but shall be first by the hope which is in God.