Sermons & Tracts 5

AGAINST THOSE WHO DENY THAT ANYTHING PERTAINS TO GOD. FIRST QUESTION. — To many, whom that worldly darkness has blinded, we are exceedingly displeasing, if we solicitously keep the precepts of God, if we flee occasions of sinning, if we strive to fulfil all good things with a saving zeal, if we neglect the seductive blandishments of allurements and vices, if we suffer ourselves to be captured by no worldly sweetness, if of our own accord we undergo tortures and punishments for the name of God, if we despise death itself by the virtue of the spirit. To those, forsooth, whom this mortal sense has persuaded that everything which is done is worthy neither of praise nor of blame. For they are unwilling that any of these things should pertain to God.

Some, indeed, desiring to defend their crimes and misdeeds, say: «It profits nothing whether you live well or ill. For God now has no such care as anxiously to hasten to behold you conducting yourself in diverse ways according to your own bent and disease, and at times to mingle His eyes with your foul deeds. Vain are all things which are performed as one pleases: He who pertains to God is set apart and removed from these human affairs, and therefore neither grows angry nor is moved; He has no contemplation of human affairs, none of our conduct; the whole course of the whirling age, and a certain inexplicable rolling of the earthly world, so seizes, snatches and casts us about, that anyone would be deemed a fool who should think he could recall himself to the care of God.»

«Nor indeed is the disposition of the martyrs to be approved, who reckon that their God, whom they proclaim to be merciful, is delighted by the shedding of their own blood. Nothing in us is dear to Him, nothing is hateful; He rejoices in no condition of our death, in no soundness of our health; nor does He desire to know what is being done anywhere: not because it is impossible for the divine majesty to have knowledge of well-nigh all things that have been done or are being done, but because He is unwilling to know the miseries of men and the vanities of the world. Thus, in fine, it is written: «Vanity of vanities, and all is vanity» (Eccles. I, 2).»

Their opinion, made firm by despair, as it is dissolved by the authority of the divine sense, so also is it convicted and overthrown by their own common sacred speech, which is held most in use. For when, amid business dealings and the contracts of various parties, fidelity and perfidy contend, the divine power is called upon as witness — that same power which is at times denied to know what we do. «God is witness,» they say; «may God see, may God judge, may God act, may God repay.» And when it comes to the necessity of an oath, and the mind of the swearer fears lest something befall him if he swear falsely; he both demands an oath, and gathers that requital can be made to him who has sworn ill to him. And when health has been longed for and good soundness attained, thanks are rendered to the divine power.

And when, some falling object having given way, the near mishap has passed off unharmed, the good God is said to have granted it. And when, by the adverse blast of the winds, the waves of the troubled sea rise up, and the ship, battered on every side, is shaken, the crowds of voyagers stretch out their hands to heaven, entreat God with suppliant voice, and are confident that they can be heard and delivered. Whence is this? If God has no care of us, if what we do is unknown to Him — then vain is this persuasion. All things are known to God. Let no one flatter himself concerning impunity for the crimes he has committed. The greatest fruit of a good life is that perpetual punishment and alternating torments are the fruit of an evil one.

Therefore to us, who believe that God knows all things, who devoutly hasten toward martyrdom, an inestimable reward and everlasting life will be granted; but to the impious, who have taught that God does not know the hidden things of their crimes and misdeeds, a consuming flame of fire and a fire never failing will be meted out. II. — Whether the Spirit that was borne over the waters is to be understood as the Holy Spirit, since it is said, 'The Spirit of the Lord was borne over the waters' (Gen. 1:2)? If for this reason He is by some supposed to be the Holy Spirit, because it is read that He is the Spirit of God, etc. III. — Whether Adam, when made and animated by God, received the Holy Spirit, since it is written, 'God breathed into his face the breath of life' (Gen. 2:7).

It was not in the order of things that he should receive the Holy Spirit, because this was reserved by God for a later time, that in the last days, when the mystery of the one God had been made manifest, He might be given to believers. From the beginning indeed the Trinity was proclaimed, but the understanding of it was as if under a veil. For the person of God the Father was first proclaimed and made manifest without hesitation and without figure, because from Him are all things. But the persons of His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit were not passed over in silence, yet neither were they made manifest. In short, concerning the Lord the Son a question was raised by the faithless, and concerning the Holy Spirit. For certain madmen call the Holy Spirit the Father Himself, just as Sabellius too calls Him the Father whom he also calls the Son.

But concerning the person of God the Father no one doubts. When therefore the manifestation of the Trinity takes place, then at last the Holy Spirit is given to believers, so that both His person may be made manifest, and those who receive Him may have a sign that they are sons of God, through this: that they have within them the Spirit of God, who is assuredly from God. For this is the signification of perfection, when it is known that both the Father is, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This perfection bestows this gift. For the Son of God, coming and disclosing and manifesting these things, owed something to the godly, and it was fitting to bestow this perfection upon believers; because neither in the Son alone, nor in the Father alone, is there perfection or salvation, but in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

Whence John the Evangelist says that of His fullness we have all received, grace for grace: for the Law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ (John 1:16-17). It is plain that at the Savior's coming the fullness of truth was accomplished. For the things that lay hidden, and that which was promised, when it is revealed and made manifest, become the fullness of truth: then believers, having received the Holy Spirit, become sons of God. For the inspiration that is said to have been made by God into Adam is the imparting of a soul: for we frequently put 'spirit' for 'soul,' since the Gospel says, among other things, 'And her spirit returned to her' (Luke 8:55). And in the Psalm:

'A troubled spirit,' it says, 'and a contrite heart God does not despise' (Ps. 50:19). Yet frequently some manuscripts do not read thus, 'God breathed in,' but 'God blew into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul.' It is not because it said 'the breath of life' that it therefore signified the Holy Spirit. For of the animals also it says thus: 'In which was the breath of life' (Gen. 7:22). It is called the breath of life, because it brings living bodies to life. IV. — Why did Adam, when placed in the world, receive a commandment or law, since he himself held dominion over the rest? Although Adam was placed as lord in the world, yet because he received this not from himself but from God, he ought to receive a token of this fact from the law;

so that he himself, who is seen to be lord, might through the law be made subject to Him who had given him this power; that the authority of the Creator might command reverence toward Himself through the law, lest so great a dominion should exalt him and make him forgetful of God his Founder. V. — Why does God say, 'My Spirit shall not remain in these men, because they are flesh: their years shall be a hundred and twenty,' etc. (Gen. 6:3)? Since there were giants upon the earth in those days, pestilent and proud, lifted up by the stature of their greatness, going after these things of the flesh, apostates by birth; then, when it displeased God, He promised that the human race would be destroyed by a flood, and He set a time;

so that if anyone, having heard of the wrath and indignation of God, should wish on this account to correct himself, he might have space for amendment. Accordingly the ark is seen to have been built by this reckoning over a hundred years. But before the beginning of the ark, twenty years are reported to have passed. Yet the narrative seems to obscure this, in that, after speaking of the number of Noah's years, it adds this. For this sentence is recognized to have been pronounced before Noah was five hundred years old. For what does it say? 'My Spirit shall not remain in these men'; and therefore it added, 'Because malice has increased upon the earth, I will blot out man from the face of the earth, even to the beasts'; which was indeed fulfilled when the flood came. For we remember that men lived for many years even after the flood:

and Aaron, the brother of Moses, is recorded to have lived a hundred and twenty-three years (Num. 33:38-39). But Moses himself, so that he could not pass a hundred and twenty years, brought this about by not glorifying God at the contradiction of the waters. For was he to enter the land of promise, had not sin stood in the way (Deut. 34:7 and 32:48-52)? For to some this seems to have been said as pertaining to the time of Moses, since Jehoiada the priest is found to have lived a hundred and thirty years (2 Chron. 24:15). VI. — What does the blessing of Jacob contain, which he gave to his sons (Gen. 48, 49)?

Not only did he foretell the future of each tribe from present causes, but he also signified future things concerning the future, of which as yet there was no shadow, in the Jewish people. For he showed what the several tribes would be in character, faith, discipline, luxury, wantonness, contempt of faith, so that, although they were of one stock, and yet did not preserve their oneness. For some indeed advanced toward the better, others grew worse, others remained the same:

so that by this they might not claim for themselves the prerogative of their lineage, since it had been foretold by him that certain of these, who were indeed of his stock, would prove reprobate, nay that many would perish, so that others were signified to enter in who would be grafted into the nature from which those had fallen, to their disgrace and condemnation. He therefore declared that a mixed people would be in all the tribes: by which variety both the good, though few, and the evil, though many, might be understood. And although he gave the scepter to his son Joseph for a time, he nevertheless set Judah over all. Not because all who were of Judah would be worthy, but because the Savior, who is truly King, was to spring from that tribe according to the flesh. VII.

— Why did the angel sent to speak to Moses appear in fire and in the bush? The angelic nature is in itself simple, whose substance seeks higher things, etc. VIII. — There was no other sign that was performed by Moses openly before Pharaoh except the serpent (Exod. 7:9). Let him who thinks this blameworthy say what else ought to have been done. For assuredly he made a serpent, which both struck terror, yet did not harm, in that by a certain stupor it is rather slow to do injury. For if he had made a lion, or a bear, or some such thing, how would those who beheld it escape? For he did not wish to kill anyone, but only to instill fear, and to show forth power;

so that, because the first transgression began through the serpent, likewise both the remembrance of the knowledge of God and the amendment of morals might come forth through the sign of the serpent, that as sin was committed, so it might also be amended: just as, since sin was wrought through a woman, it was through a woman taken away, namely through Mary the mother of the Lord, from whom Christ, being born, condemned sin. Eve transgressed while yet a virgin, just as Mary too was a virgin. In this way therefore the things that had perished were recalled to their former state: because both the kingdom had been lost through the tasting of the tree, and again through the tree it was sought. 'For the Lord,' it says, 'reigned from the tree' (Ps.

95:10). In like manner also the world, in which he was made, is to be reformed into heaven, that is, at the beginning of the first month, which is the Passover: for no nature will be evil except transgression alone; since sin was amended through that by which it was also committed. IX. — If there is one God, why is the hope of salvation in three, and not in two, or four, or at least in one; and why was the Trinity not proclaimed earlier? There is indeed one God, but He is not solitary, etc. X. — Why were circumcision and precepts given to the people, which formerly did not exist, nor are they now held in authority?

Circumcision is a sign of the faith of Abraham, so that when this sign was seen in his sons, they might be known to be the sons of him who, believing God, received this sign (Gen. 17:10-11). But the precepts of the sabbaths were given both by the testimony of things past, and as a figure of things to come (Exod. 20:9-11). For this sabbath, which was made into the completed week, is a figure of the future sabbath, which will grant rest in the eternal things. But the law of foods was not given at the beginning of the Law, but when, through faithlessness, refusing to give faith to God's warnings and promises, they received, for the hardness of their heart, precepts that were not good, as the prophet Jeremiah says (Ezek. 20:25).

This indeed was done, that their neck might be bowed, for their profit. For the whole creation ought not to be made subject to proud and stubborn men. But afterward, when the mercy of God came, the freedom of eating was restored. Whence the apostle Peter says: 'Why do you place a yoke upon the neck of the brethren, which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear?' (Acts 15:10). XI. — If on account of their distrust and detractions the Jews received harsh commandments, what had their sons sinned, that they too should be bound by these commandments? The law was given to the fathers, which was a burden to sons like them. For afterward they sinned against God no less, but perhaps even more, than their fathers.

For God, foreknowing, gave this law rather to the sons; because they all died in the wilderness. XII. — Why in the Law was it said even to Aaron himself that he should offer holocausts for his own sins, since David says, 'For offenses you did not require a holocaust' (Ps. 39:7); and in what follows, 'You will not delight in holocausts' (Ps. 50:18)? How did He command that to be offered in which He does not delight? It is manifest that God does not delight in holocausts, but that pardon can be merited, for the satisfaction of sin, by the groaning and sorrow of the heart. But He willed the sacrifice to be a testimony of sin, so that the sinner might, through the offering of the sacrifice, confess that he had sinned.

But how remission might be obtained, He Himself shows in another place, saying, 'Break your bread to the hungry: if you see one naked, clothe him, and do not despise the household of your own seed' (Isa. 58:7): or certainly, 'A contrite and humbled heart God does not despise' (Ps. 50:19). First therefore He admonished that the offense must be confessed; then He showed how it can be pardoned. For never did He command a sacrifice for a manifest offense, but for things unknown; because a man sins even when he does not know it, and when he thinks he is acting rightly, by a certain intention he offends. Such a sin He said could be purged through sacrifice. XIII. — What is the meaning that death, when sent to Jacob, came upon Israel; since Jacob himself is Israel? He set down two names for one people.

For assuredly he who was formerly called Jacob, etc. XIV. — If the soul that sins shall itself die, what is the meaning that, when Carmi sinned, thirty-six men are seen to have been killed on his account? Carmi indeed sinned, and died by stones. But those thirty-six men, etc. XV. — What does the prophet mean when he says, 'Rejoice, barren one who do not bear; break forth and cry out, you who do not travail: for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her who has a husband'? In this place we understand two mothers, the heavenly and the earthly, that is, the free Jerusalem, etc. XVI. — 'Let the earth bless the Lord,' it says, that is, let it praise and confess Your power:

how then in the Psalms does it say, 'Shall the dust confess to You, or declare Your power?' It is not to be understood as it is read and as the words sound, etc. XVII. — 'In the sun,' it says, 'He set His tabernacle' (Ps. 18:6), that is, His body in which Christ dwelt, who was scourged with whips by Pilate: how then is it said in the Psalm concerning Christ, 'The scourge shall not come near your tabernacle' (Ps. 90:10)? seeing that He called His body a temple. And the body both of the son of man and of the Son of God is understood to be a temple. Yet God, that is, the Son of God, although He came in the flesh, nevertheless dwelt in the soul. Therefore both

the soul as well as the body is the tabernacle of the Son of God, who is both God and man, the Son of God and the son of man. Therefore in this respect the scourge is said not to have come near His tabernacle; that is, His soul, in which His divinity dwells, was immune from the punishment of hell or of its princes. Lest, because He was here crucified as though a sinner, when He is innocent, and the flesh suffered, His soul should be thought to have suffered some sadness among the powers below, Scripture shows that His soul could not be troubled among the powers below, because He descended for this purpose, that is, He permitted Himself to suffer, in order to confound the darkness and to send back its princes dulled. Whence the Lord Himself says: 'My soul is sorrowful even unto death' (Matt. 26:38).

For it was permitted, as belonged to His nature, that He should be saddened, at once bearing back the trophy, and the spoils of those by whom He had been saddened even unto death, after death now established in eternal joy. It can also be understood of the whole man; because He who knew no sin could not be scourged by the law. XVIII. — Why did Solomon have the spirit of wisdom (1 Kings 3), when he did not have a pure life? for he greatly delighted in women, and through this he sinned (ibid. 11). First by his own merit he received the spirit of prudence; but afterward, when he began to indulge too much in women, and through this to sin, if he had the spirit of wisdom, he had it by the merit of the kingdom; just as Nebuchadnezzar too, by the merit of the kingdom, saw Christ in the furnace. XIX.

— In Solomon it says, 'There is hope in the darkness, and a living dog is better than a dead lion.' Darkness signifies ignorance and heathenism: because there is more hope in a heathen than in an apostate, etc. XX. — In Wisdom it says, 'Who created the world out of unseen matter': and on the contrary, that we were made out of nothing (Wisd. 11:18 and 2:2). That God created the confused substances together, the sense of the Scriptures makes clear, darkness assuredly being mingled in. This confusion of things, that is, air, fire, water, earth, darkness, He called unseen matter, as it is read in Genesis: 'But the earth,' it says, 'was invisible and unformed' (Gen. 1:2).

Out of this confusion therefore He created the world, having established the firmament, so that within it, the waters being gathered into one, a habitation might be made for the human race. For, the substances being distinguished and separated, He made a habitable dwelling in the hollow. FIRST QUESTION. — Why were the deeds and words of the Lord set down in Scripture in four volumes by four writers? It was fitting that the acceptable year of the Lord, as the prophet says (Isa. 61:2), should be contained by four volumes, as it were by four turns. For just as the year unfolds in four seasons, so that they need one another in turn, so also the deeds and words of the Lord were defined in four books, so that one has need of another: yet together they are made complete in fullness.

But that they should be arranged by four writers, this was the reason: that, because the names of the seasons are diverse, the titles of the Gospels also should be diverse. And if any things seem contrary in words, yet in sense they do not disagree, through an interpretation fitted to the matter: just as the seasons, though they seem indeed diverse in name, in the air, and in the course of the stars, yet in the effect of the things that are brought forth they do not disagree. II. — Since it is established that four books of the deeds and words of the Lord were rightly written, it must be known what their order is. The Gospel is gathered by arrangement rather than by time.

Matthew therefore is to be placed first, because he took his beginning from the very promise, that is, from Abraham, to whom the promise was made of the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. After him Luke, because he narrates how this incarnation was accomplished. Third, Mark, who attests that the Gospel which was preached by Christ was promised in the Law. But fourth, John, because—Him who was promised to Abraham as to be incarnate, and to whom it was told by Luke how He was incarnated, and by Mark shown that His Gospel was preached according to the prophet Isaiah—John, with open voice, shows to be God, saying, 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God' (John 1:1). III.

— Why, when describing the Gospel of Christ, does Matthew say, 'The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David' (Matt. 1:1); when Abraham is prior? For this reason he thus began, that he might first speak of Him from the promise of His incarnation, describing His genealogy, as the Apostle says, 'Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh' (Rom. 9:5). Therefore he said, 'The book of the generation'; because the incarnation of Christ consists of many and diverse persons, so that, since diverse men began to be from one, He might draw bodily substance from all. From Jews and Gentiles, and from the worthy and the unworthy: for Ruth was a Moabitess, and Bathsheba, from an adulteress, was made a wife; so that, drawing the flesh of all to Himself, He might recall them to true unity.

Therefore he says, 'of Jesus Christ, the son of David,' although Abraham is prior; because Christ is specially called the son of David, on account of the kingdom: so that, as God from God, so also He might take His rise as King from a king according to the flesh. For thus it was said to David: 'Of the fruit of your womb I will set upon your throne' (Ps. 131:11). IV. — Why did the aforesaid apostle Matthew divide all the generations into three parts (Matt. 1:17)? Causes and times make the divisions. For this reason he distinguished from Abraham until David. For the first part of the cause is from Abraham until David; because Abraham is the father of faith, and David the father of the kingdom. For Saul, being made unworthy, deprived himself of the kingdom.

But from David until the deportation there came together another part, in which they lost the kingdom, the Jews being made reprobate. But after the deportation of Babylon until Christ, the third part, of lamentation and misery, of their captivity and dispersion: because, although after the deportation of Babylon and the time of seventy years, when, dismissed by Cyrus, they returned to their own land, yet they never had rest or repose. For neither afterward could Judea reign, but they were always anxious and wandering. For assuredly at the time of Christ's nativity they were captives, saying: 'We have no king but Caesar' (John 19:15).

For this reason therefore Matthew made three stages of the generation, that he might also show the changes of merits and causes from the promise made until Christ, but that the seasons of the year continue in one grace until the end. V. — Why, when there are forty-one generations, does the Evangelist seem to have counted forty-two (Matt. 1:17)? For three times fourteen—what do they make but forty-two? According to the number, forty-one generations are counted; but according to the reckoning, forty-two are proved. But Jechoniah, begotten in the deportation, that is, made king, as is contained in Chronicles, made the end of the second part:

and because after the deportation he remained in the kingdom by the permission of King Nebuchadnezzar, from him the third part begins, which comes down to Christ. And therefore he is reckoned in both, so that he both concludes the second part and begins the third—Jechoniah. For thus it reads: 'And after the deportation of Babylon, Jechoniah begot Salathiel' (Matt. 1:12). But down to this Salathiel there reigned those who are of Judah, namely those from whose root Joseph is born. For Jechoniah first had a son named Assur. But since Joseph draws his origin through the root of Salathiel, Assur being passed over, Salathiel was joined to Jechoniah his father, so that one might come to Joseph, to whom the virgin Mary was betrothed. For after Josiah, Jechoniah follows.

But because through Joachim, the father of Jechoniah, one comes to Joseph, he passed over him, that is Joachim, and set down Jechoniah, so as not to exceed the number of fourteen generations, and because after Jechoniah are Salathiel and his son, through whom Joseph arises. VI. — Why in Matthew is the father of Joseph written as Jacob, and in Luke as Heli; so that either he is unskillfully described as having two fathers, or at least it is not known who is truly his father? It is not doubtful that the father of Joseph was Jacob. For the order, holding its course through Solomon from David, comes by a straight track to Jacob, etc. VII. — It is manifest that when the Savior, the Son of God, was born He was called Christ: why then, after His baptism, did the tempter approach Him, saying, 'If you are the Son of God?'

etc. (Matt. 4:3). The Savior was so born of the Virgin that He was both Christ and the Son of God, not by making, but by birth. But still, in His lesser age, emptying His power, that is, dissembling from His own authority, He did not provoke the impudence of the devil. But when He was baptized, the Holy Spirit descending upon Him, when He had appeared to men by the testimony of God the Father, the enemy, led by the emulation of zeal, was drawn to do injury, seeing that this deed was against himself: for he understood that the ordinance of baptism was procured for the salvation of men. And therefore he approaches the Savior, the author of this thing, not to approve it, but to find an occasion for overthrowing it. For temptation is sometimes made for proving, sometimes with guile for subversion.

For he supposed that, as it were, he had elicited from the Savior, according to the guile of his own will, an answer, so that he might hold his whole kingdom secure, since, the doctrine of the Savior being subjected to his leadership, no one would escape his death. VIII. — Why does the Savior resist the devil tempting Him only with examples from the Law (Matt. 4:4-10)? The Savior answered not only the devil tempting Him, but also the Jews through whom he wrought the impiety of his cruelty against the Savior. For, foreknowing that the Jews would call Him an enemy of the Law, He restrained by the testimonies of the Law the impudence of the devil their father, so that He might condemn the father in the sons, and the sons in the father. IX. — Why, after His baptism, did the Savior fast forty days, and afterward hunger (Matt. 4:2)?

For He who fasted forty days could indeed have not hungered. It is written, 'Son, when you come to the service of God, stand in justice and fear, and prepare your soul for temptation' (Sir. 2:1). And therefore the Savior fasted, that He might give us a form; so that in like manner we too, persevering in fasts, might by the help of God overcome every motion of the devil set against us, knowing by the example of the Savior that the snares of the adversary are then the more to be guarded against, when we draw near to the fear of God. For he grieves that we have withdrawn from him: therefore he rages the more against us. This the Savior did for us, not for Himself. Likewise also that He hungered was not for His own cause, but for ours.

For when the temptations of the devil had been overcome by fasts—which for this reason are not written down, because they do not pertain to the advancement of doctrine—afterward, that is, after forty days, He permitted (what belonged to man) that He should suffer hunger: so that the devil, who had already been overcome, seeing weakness in Him again, might be incited once more to tempt, seeing that He was a man by whom he was being conquered. For this was the mystery of the Savior: that, because he had insulted and lorded it over conquered man, he might be conquered by a man, so that the power of God might acquire victory for man: and thus Satan was rendered the more contemptible, when he both perceives a man, and does not understand the power that is not man's. For he marveled, dulled with stupor, that there was a mystery which lay hidden from him:

so that there might be power to approach, but not power to circumvent. For he was tormented by two causes. For seeing weakness, he approached, and found power; so that, perceiving a man, he was made suspicious concerning the power of God. For this end therefore He hungered, that He might mock the cunning of Satan. But for this reason He did not fast longer, that He might agree with Moses and Elijah. X. — What is the meaning that, when John the Baptist had first borne witness to the Savior, he afterward doubted, saying through his disciples: 'Are you He who is to come, or do we await another?' (Matt. 11:3-10)? Those who think that John doubted detract from the Savior. For either they rightly assert that he doubted, or else they charge the Savior with ignorance; because, as they suppose, He praised one who thought ill of himself.

But because it is impossible for the Savior to be deceived, John was rightly praised by Him. If he was rightly praised, he did not doubt. For at the very time when John sent his disciples from prison to Jesus, saying, 'Are you He who is to come, or do we await another?' then Jesus answered his disciples, saying: 'Go, tell John the things you see and hear. The blind see, the deaf hear, the lepers are cleansed, the lame walk, the dead rise, and blessed is he who shall not be scandalized in me.' And as the messengers of John were departing, Jesus began to say to the crowds concerning John the Baptist: 'What did you go out into the desert to see? a reed shaken by the wind, or a man clothed in soft garments?'

Behold, those who are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings. But what did you go out to see? a prophet? I say to you, more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, 'Behold, I send my angel before your face, who shall prepare your way.' Then the publicans praised God, having been baptized with the baptism of John. But how great is the praise given to John, that he should be said to be more than a prophet, and that the Savior calls him blessed who is not scandalized in Him? how then is John held back, who by doubting was scandalized? But surely he did not doubt. For the praise proves him blessed, because he was not scandalized.

For the Savior also, for this reason, at that very time burst forth into the praise of John, that He might show that the mind of John was free from the doubt of his disciples. For John, wishing to strengthen his wondering disciples in faith in the Savior, knowing that his own departure was imminent, willed that the things he had said concerning Him should be confirmed by His own mouth: therefore, that he might be a true witness, he implores the testimony of the greater one, so that by their agreement all ambiguity might be taken away. This was John's device, that he might send his doubting disciples, as it were, by his own words, so that, hearing the same things from the Savior which they had heard from John, they might be confirmed, knowing that the testimony of a worthy steward and of the heavenly Lord cannot be called into doubt.

For this reason the Savior also, as it were, answered John, so that between John questioning and the Savior answering they might learn the truth. XI. — What is the meaning that above we read that Herod was dead (Matt. 2:19), but below, and after many years, that Herod killed John (ibid. 14:1-11), since above, Herod being dead, John survived? Herod was king of Judea: he had four sons, Archelaus, Herod, Philip, and Lysanias: but when Herod their father was dead, Archelaus succeeded, and when he died, the kingdom of the aforesaid Herod was divided into four parts, so that Pilate was admitted into the fourth part of the kingdom, as a governor, not as a king (Matt. 2:22, and Luke 3:1): but the sons of Herod were called kings.

Then, after Philip had died, Herod his brother took Philip's wife, and on this account he was rebuked by John the Baptist; for which cause Herod, the son of the aforementioned Herod, put John to death. For what does the text say? 'Herod,' it says, 'the tetrarch'; that is, one set over the fourth part of the kingdom of his father Herod. Why then is there any doubt, when the meaning of the added surname shows that this is a different Herod? For it is that same one who also slew with the sword James, the brother of John, who afterward, being smitten by an angel of God and swarming with worms, breathed his last. XII. — The Lord taught that we must indeed pray for our enemies: how then is it that they cry out to avenge the souls of the slain, demanding vengeance from the Lord? For the Apocalypse, concerning things to come...

...and that the tribulations of unbelief and of an evil life bear witness to God as the avenger of their causes, and so forth. XIII. — If the Law ceased already when the Saviour or John was preaching, how does the Saviour say: 'I came not to destroy the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfil them'? For if it ceased, how is it not either dissolved or destroyed, since it lost its authority to command? The sayings of the Prophets concerning the Saviour's coming were fulfilled when he came, and so forth. XIV. — John sends to the Lord: 'Art thou he that is to come, or do we look for another' (Matthew 11)? Under his own person he pleads the cause of his disciples. For John did not doubt, he who had said: 'Behold the Lamb of God, behold him that taketh away the sins of the world' (John 1:29):

but in order to satisfy his disciples, he sent them with his own words, so that by the Saviour's own mouth he might confirm what he himself had been teaching about him; that after his own departure his disciples might follow Christ without any doubt. XV. — Why is it said that the Law and the Prophets were rightly in force until John, and ceased afterward (Matthew 11:13)? Because he of whom they prophesied had already come. Why 'until John,' when the Apostle says that we ought to be subject to the Law: 'The powers that be,' he says, 'are ordained of God' (Romans 13:1)? The Law indeed has but one name, yet it has a threefold understanding. For the first part of the Law is about God. For 'Law' is so called from 'reading' (lectio), that out of many things you may know what to choose.

Being placed therefore amid errors, they received the command to choose the truth; that is, having reprobated the devil, they should choose God. Now the second part of the Law is this, namely that which is contained in the precepts, which thus begins: 'Honour thy father and thy mother.' But the third is in the new moons and in the sabbath, and in the distinguishing and choosing of foods, and in circumcision, and in the offering of victims of cattle. This Law, therefore, he says was to be kept only until John. For it was given in such a way that, when the appointed time was completed, it should cease; for it was not from the beginning, but was given for a time on account of a cause, so that when the Saviour came the Law should cease. Therefore of God there abides both the Law of the precepts and his nature, which, being without doubt, cannot be abolished by him.

For through it one advances toward the promised reward. For fear begets solicitude. XVI. — Since the Saviour says that John's baptism is from heaven, why, when he speaks to Nicodemus about baptism and Nicodemus doubts, does he say: 'If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not' (etc.)? What he said, 'If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not,' does not pertain to baptism, and so forth. XVII. — What is the reason that the Saviour at first denied mercy to the foreign woman, that is, the Canaanite (Matthew 15:22-28), whereas to the foreign centurion, and to the leper whom Jesus himself called a foreigner, he did not deny the benefit of bestowing salvation (Luke 7:2-10 and 17:12-19)? The very cause marks out the fitting deed of the Saviour.

For it would have been absurd, and would have worked to the injury of the promise made to the Fathers, if a woman who had not confessed the God of the Jews were to receive the benefit promised to him who confesses God. Therefore at first it was denied to her. But when, with bowed neck, she did not deny faith to the Saviour's words, but confessed that the believing Jews were sons, while the Gentiles were dogs or servants—by which she joined herself to the Lord's faith, since servants point to a master, and a master is not without servants—there came about a unity of the subject and the one subjecting. Hence it is that she deserved to obtain what she had prayed for. But the centurion, who received the benefit from the Saviour without hesitation, had long since given himself over to the things of God. Finally the elders of the Jews say to the Lord:

'He is worthy that thou shouldest grant this to him; for he loveth our nation, and himself hath built us a synagogue.' Now the Lord called the leper a foreigner, not by faith, but by nation. For he was a Samaritan, and it is established that the Samaritans are by origin from the Babylonians. And yet even he obtained the benefit not without confession; for it had been said to the disciples by the Lord: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not, but go rather to the sheep that are lost of the house of Israel' (Matthew 10:5-6); that is, that it should not be preached to the Samaritans and Gentiles before the Jews, whose this promise had been. But when the Jews began to reject the faith of Christ, then also the Samaritan woman:

the Saviour offered himself, and after the cross to the centurion Cornelius; but the Canaanite woman, when she besought him, he received; because it was not yet the time for salvation to be offered to them. XVIII. — How is it proved that the Saviour said he would rise from the dead after three days and after three nights, when he suffered on the Preparation of the Passover and rose again at the dawning of the Lord's Day, while it was yet dark? Whence the number of days and nights does not seem to agree. The Saviour, foreknowing all things that were to be in himself, testified these things beforehand, and so forth. XIX. — Why does the Saviour say, 'Pray that your flight be not in the winter, nor on the sabbath' (Matthew 24:20):

since the time of this persecution cannot be deferred, as the Apostle says, 'Who shall be revealed in his own time' (2 Thessalonians 2:6, 8); and in the Acts the Apostle says, 'Determining the appointed times and the bounds of their habitation' (Acts 17:26)? And why does he signify that flight is not expedient in the winter or on the sabbath? In winter flight is not safe: for there is cold, continual rains, snow, frost; rivers overflow; and therefore it is very grievous for those who flee. For they cannot hide in the woods, nor in the mountains, nor in caves. And on the sabbath, according to the Jews, it is not permitted to go far from the city, nor to ascend a height, and on this account flight cannot take place on the sabbath. Even as these seasons do not make flight safe because of the hindrances mentioned above;

so too our flight will not be safe, if the foretold persecution finds us bound by fleshly hindrances. For worldly desires—that is, worldly resources—detain men like fetters, so that they cannot escape the decrees of the devil. Therefore we must pray that, at the time when we must flee, there be not found in us the manner of winter and of the sabbath, but that God's help may make us free from these hindrances, so that there be nothing to hand us over, captive to its desire, to the world. Since therefore the Saviour was speaking of the last persecution, which is to come from Antichrist, he set down winter, because it is the harshest season:

and likewise the sabbath, because it is the last day; so that, just as in these seasons flight is harsh and difficult, so he might signify that at that time the persecutions and pressures would be so grave that scarcely anyone could escape them. XX. — When the Saviour said that he would suffer, and rise again after the third day, he added, 'And after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee; there ye shall see me'; and the angel likewise to the women (Matthew 26:32 and 28:7): yet he is found by the women and by his disciples in Jerusalem. To cavil at the words of the Saviour is the mark of an unbeliever:

but I see that you do not doubt the Saviour's words, but seek their meaning: why, when he was seen in Jerusalem after his passion, he said he would be seen by them in Galilee. In Jerusalem he was seen, but piecemeal, to restore the spirits of the disciples; but in Galilee by all together. Therefore, to those who were to see him in Jerusalem in parts, he appointed Galilee, that he might appear to all at once, and might give precepts for the ordering of discipline. XXI. — Three evangelists say that the Saviour was crucified at the sixth hour, but the evangelist Mark says he was crucified at the third hour. But certain diligent men (by their own industry) say that the sentence was given at the third hour, and on this account he was crucified 'at the third hour.'

For once sentence has been given, a man is already reckoned as dead. But it is established that after the fifth hour, in the sixth, Pilate sat upon the judgment seat and thus gave sentence, as John shows. To wrap the truth in obscurities is not good. For the very concord bears witness that the three evangelists spoke the truth, and so forth. XXII. — If the Saviour was baptized in order to be an example, why, being circumcised, did he forbid the rest to be circumcised? Circumcision was granted until Christ. But Abraham received circumcision in Christ who was promised, and so forth. XXIII. — When the Jews accused the disciples of acting against the law of the sabbath by plucking ears of grain, the Saviour brought forward the example of David, saying:

'Have ye not known what David did when he was hungry, how he took the loaves of the shewbread and ate, and gave to those who were with him, which was not lawful except for the priests alone?' Now this example does not seem to excuse the disciples, but both they and David can be seen as transgressors. The Saviour was unwilling to prejudge the Jews concerning the time when the sabbath was fulfilled, and so forth. XXIV. — Why did the Saviour call his disciples 'sons of thunder' (Mark 3:17), who would rather seem to be called 'sons of God'? For thunders are said to be produced by the collision of clouds. Because thunders strike terror, for this cause he called the disciples 'sons of thunder,' as though sons of him who is to be feared.

For although thunders are produced by the collision of clouds, yet they are produced by the will of God, and they are terrible. XXV. — What is the reason that, according to the account of the evangelist Mark, Christ's will is not fulfilled? For it says: 'Entering into a house, he would have no man know it, and he could not be hid.' If then he willed to be hidden and could not, his will was weakened. This is what has been set forth in a summary way, that... he might conceal the meaning, and so forth. XXVI. — In the Gospel we read that the angel says to Mary the mother of the Lord, that of his kingdom—that is, of Christ's—there shall be no end (Luke 1:33). And Daniel says the same: for he says, 'Then shall a kingdom arise for ever, which shall never be corrupted' (Daniel 7:14). Against this the Apostle, concerning the Lord:

'When he shall have delivered up,' he says, 'the kingdom to God and the Father' (1 Corinthians 15:24). How shall he have an eternal kingdom, which he is said to be about to deliver up to God and the Father? In the matter of the Father and the Son—that is, of God and of Christ—a 'delivering up' is to be understood, not an abolition. Consider indeed how the Father delivered the kingdom to the Son, the Lord himself testifying this: 'All things,' he says, 'are delivered unto me by my Father' (Matthew 11:27). If, then, the Father ceased to have it when he delivered it, it can be said also of the Saviour that when he delivered it, he lost it. For the Son, after he said the kingdom was delivered to him by the Father, still preferring the Father, says: 'And this is eternal life, that they may know thee the only and true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent' (John 17:3).

According to this understanding, therefore, both the Son does not lose the kingdom when he delivers it up, so that these things may be true; and the angel and Daniel are not said to be at variance with this understanding. For whoever thinks that the testimony of these is to be cavilled at, is full of treachery. But now let us, remaining in this faith, see what it is for the Son to deliver up the kingdom to the Father: for this is what, among other things, the Apostle says in another place: 'Then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all' (1 Corinthians 15:28). This subjection, therefore, is itself the delivering up of the kingdom. And so in this passage an interpretation seems necessary, so that both the Son may not be denied to be subject to the Father, and nonetheless may be said to have an eternal kingdom. This is the kingdom of the Son, because in the name...

...the name of Jesus every knee bows, of things in heaven, on earth, and under the earth (Philippians 2:10). This the apostle Peter also confirms, saying: 'There is none other name given under heaven whereby we must be saved' (Acts 4:12). And the Lord himself says to his disciples: 'Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name; ask, and I will do it' (John 16:24). Thus the Son reigns, when all things are saved in his name, and the things that are asked are granted, even to the end of the world. But after all things have confessed Christ, whether by force or by will, and have been subjected to the power of him whom they had resisted, the mystery of the one God shall be manifested to all, and all thanksgiving shall be referred to the Father, from whom are all things;

so that, when the preaching has ceased, the one God may be known in the mystery of the Trinity. For when all powers, all principalities and dominions have bowed the knee to Christ, then the Son will manifest that he is not the one from whom all things are, but the Son of him, and that that One is seen in him. This is the subjection and the delivering up of the kingdom. For, showing that the Father is the one from whom all things are, he subjected himself to him when he says that he is from him. For so great a majesty and brightness is seen at the coming of the Son, that all the powers and choirs of the Angels think this One to be the singular God. But the Saviour, when he has said that he is not that One who is called the Father, but his Son, reigning, delivers up the kingdom to the Father. In this matter both the subjection and the delivering up of the kingdom are made manifest;

because, when he professes himself to be from the Father, whatever he has, he confesses to be the Father's, referring the whole sum to him. XXVII. — The Saviour says, 'If any man forsake not all that he has—that is, house and field and the rest—he cannot be my disciple'; but on the other hand the evangelist says, 'There came Joseph of Arimathea, a rich man, who himself also was a disciple of Jesus, waiting for the kingdom of God' (Luke 14:33 and 23:50-51). How is it that the evangelist professes him to be a disciple whom the Saviour denied to be one? For Zacchaeus too was rich, and Cornelius the centurion was rich, and the women who ministered to them out of their substance. This meaning the Apostle resolves in a few words, saying: 'Let those who have be as though they had not;

and those who use this world, as though they used it not; and those who buy, as though they possessed not' (1 Corinthians 7:30-31). Whoever, then, so holds these things as though he had them not, is seen to have forsaken them. For when a man does not presume upon these things, nor boasts himself, but walks humbly—not only in his outward habit but also in mind—understanding himself to be their steward and minister, he is seen to have forsaken all his goods. For that is said to be forsaken which one withdraws from in desire, and holds not as an object of favour. XXVIII. — If the Law and the Prophets were until John, how does the Saviour send to the priests to have gifts offered for cleansing? The apostle Paul had regard to this. For when he was preaching that no one ought any longer to be circumcised, and so forth.

XXIX. — If the Law and the Prophets were until John, from whom the kingdom of heaven was preached (Luke 16:16)—for he is the beginner of the new preaching—why did his baptism cease? The baptism of John, once begun, did not cease, but there was added to it what was lacking. For John only baptized, but did not give the Holy Spirit to believers: as he himself says of the Saviour, 'I baptize you with water unto repentance, but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit' (Matthew 3:11). This is what he says: 'Through me is the remission of sins, but the Holy Spirit is not yet given, that we may be called purified sons; for this was reserved to the Saviour, as to the Lord, that they should not become sons of God except by receiving the Holy Spirit from the Son of God.'

The effect, therefore, of John's baptism—which he wrought silently, without interrogation, yet not without mention of the Saviour, that what he did might be firm—is the gift of the Trinity: which the Saviour's condescension showed, giving the form of the three names, which from the beginning wrought one and undivided work under the name or person of the one God. An interpretation, then, was added to John's baptism, with a signification of the mystery long hidden; and a further gift was added, that those baptized, having received the Holy Spirit, might be sons of God. It was therefore amplified, not emptied. XXX. — In the Gospel of John it says, 'The Law was given by Moses; but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.'

If, then, truth came by Christ, it was not before. If it was not before, how is the Law said to have been given by God, in which there was no truth? We must see what it means, 'The Law was given by Moses.' Now the Law given by Moses has manifest precepts, and so forth. XXXI. — The sabbath surely is the Law, or a part of the Law; how then is the Law not made void, when the evangelist says, 'He not only broke the sabbath, but also said that God was his Father' (John 5:18)? The Saviour indeed broke the sabbath, but without prejudice to the appointed sabbath. For while the time of the sabbath was already ceasing, but the Jews still asserted that the sabbath abode, the Saviour, working on the sabbaths and commanding the sick man to carry his bed on the sabbaths, broke the sabbath according to the understanding of the Jews.

For according to the faith of truth it is as if it were said of what had already ceased, just as it is if it be said of someone who is to be called a 'former prefect,' and had suffered an injury, that 'the prefecture' suffered the injury. The sabbath, therefore, was not dissolved, but the men who impudently claimed the authority of the sabbath were mocked, since a new Law had already succeeded the sabbath. XXXII. — If we live by our own choice, why does the Saviour say, 'No man comes to me, except the Father who sent me draw him'; and, not disagreeing with these, the Apostle says, 'It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy'? By these the freedom of the will's choice seems to be disturbed.

For if no one goes unless he is drawn, there will be no fault of him who does not go because he is not drawn. And if it is not he who asks and runs that receives, but God gives to whom he wills, then he who wills and does not obtain will be without fault and without blame; and the blame redounds upon him who spurns the one who asks. In no way, from these, can the cause of free will be disturbed. For if you refer the sayings to the cause for which they were said, and so forth. XXXIII. — Why is it that, when the Saviour had cured nearly all by a word, he yet restored the eyes of the blind man by clay made from spittle (John 9:6-7)? This the Saviour did for the confusion of those who accuse the Creator. For when he mended the defect that had befallen the body no otherwise than as the Maker had made it, he commended the author of this work.

For he mended it by that whereby it had been made. For everything that is made, if, when it has fallen, it is restored by that whereby it had been made, will be proved to be made aright. For if the Saviour testifies himself to be God by this, that he mended the damages and defects of the body, how much more is he God who is the inventor of the body itself? XXXIV. — What is it that the Saviour says, 'I am the door; all who came before me are thieves and robbers' (John 10:7-8)? This saying seems to strike at the Prophets. Because no one goes to God the Father except through faith in Christ, therefore the Saviour calls himself the door of the kingdom of heaven. If, then, he uses the words of a door, what need was there for him to say of those before him, 'As many as came before me,' when no question was being raised about things past;

but surely, as a present door, the question was about those present? For the Saviour speaks of the Jews, who thought to enter into the kingdom of God, not by faith, but by the righteousness of the Law. For coming before the Saviour—that is, standing before him—they disparaged him, contradicting him, so that they might turn others also away from faith in him. Whence they were called thieves and robbers. For at that time these things were said, when the Pharisees were disputing with him who had been enlightened from being blind, to whom the Saviour restored the eyes that nature had denied; and they wished to turn him away from faith in the Saviour, saying that one could not enter into the kingdom of God through this man, because he violates the sabbath, but through the righteousness of the Law. Then the Saviour: 'I am,' he says, 'the door;

if any man enter in by me, he shall find pasture; but if any man wish to enter in some other way, he is a thief and a robber.' How does this pertain to the person of the Prophets? Did the Prophets, against the doctrine of Christ, say that God could be won by the righteousness of the Law without faith—they who knew that Christ would come in the flesh? This, therefore, he said of those present, so that whoever were before himself, standing or sitting, might be understood to be thieves and robbers. For calling away him who had been blind, they wished to turn him from faith in the Saviour, saying: 'Give glory to God; we know that this man is a sinner.' Whom he refuted, saying: 'Since the world began it was never heard that anyone opened the eyes of one born blind:

if this man were not from God, he could do nothing' (John 9:24, 32, 33). Concerning this man, then, because he persevered in faith; and concerning those who said, 'These are not the words of one that has a devil; can a devil open the eyes of the blind?'—the Saviour said, 'But the sheep did not hear them' (John 10:8, 9, 21): those, namely, whom he called thieves and robbers. For how did the sheep not hear the Prophets, when it is established from the Scriptures that all the good obeyed the Prophets, and the evil the false prophets? XXXV. — What is the reason that, when about to work a marvellous and unheard-of miracle—namely, to raise Lazarus from the dead—he wept, or, as if ignorant, sought the place where he was laid (John 11:34, 35)?

The Saviour is both God and man, and on this account he always performed two alternating roles: so that, because he has the affection of a man, he weeps; but because he was also God, he raised up the very one whom he had wept. From the least things, therefore, one always comes to the greater, so that, because he was seen to be a man, he might reprove the thought that he was only what he seemed; but by his works he asserted himself to be God. XXXVI. — Since the Saviour says, 'I pray for those whom thou hast given me; I pray not for the world' (John 17:9), while the apostle John, on the contrary, says, 'We have an advocate with the Father, an intercessor for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the whole world' (1 John 2:1-2): this seems contradictory.