Aquinas: john/english/John10.html comparison

comparison john/english/John10.html @ 31:25a799388159

originals from http://www.josephkenny.joyeurs.com/CDtexts/SSJohn.htm

author	ht
date	Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:16:17 +0000
parents
children	178aed5d2c3c

comparison

equal deleted inserted replaced

-:b56c501d878e
+:25a799388159
+<html>
+<head>
+</head>
+<body style=text-align:justify><blockquote>
+<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 60pt">10</span>
+<p align=center><B>LECTURE I</B>
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>1 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the
+sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a
+robber; 2 but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him
+the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by
+name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes before
+them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 A stranger they will
+not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of
+strangers.</BLOCKQUOTE>
+<p>1364 After our Lord showed that his teaching had power to
+enlighten, he here shows that he has power to give life. First, he shows this
+by word; secondly, by a miracle (chap 11). Concerning the first he does three
+things. First, he shows that he has life-giving power; secondly, his manner of
+giving life (v 11); thirdly, he explains his power to give life (v 19). The
+first part is divided into three parts. First, our Lord relates a parable;
+secondly, the Evangelist mentions the necessity for explaining it (v 6);
+thirdly, our Lord explains the parable (v 7).
+<p>He relates the parable to them,
+saying, <b>Truly, truly, I say to you</b>. It concerns two things, a thief and
+the shepherd of the sheep. Thus he does three things. First, he mentions the
+mark of a thief and robber; secondly, a characteristic of the shepherd (v 2);
+thirdly, the effect each of these has (v 4).
+<p>1365 To understand this parable we must consider who the
+sheep are, namely, that they are the faithful of Christ and those in the grace
+of God: "We are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand" (Ps
+95:7); "You, the people, are the sheep of my pasture" [Ez 34:31]. And so the
+sheepfold is the multitude of the faithful: "I will surely gather all of you, O
+Jacob, I will gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep
+in a fold" (Mic 2:12). The door of the sheepfold is explained in different ways
+by Chrysostom and by Augustine.
+<p>1366 According to Chrysostom, Christ calls Sacred Scripture
+the door, according to "Pray for us also that God may open to us a door for the
+word" (Col 4:3). Sacred Scripture is called a door, as Chrysostom says, first
+of all, because through it we have access to the knowledge of God: "which he
+promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures" (Rom 1:2).
+Secondly, for just as the door guards the sheep, so Sacred Scripture preserves
+the life of the faithful: "You search the scriptures, because you think that in
+them you have eternal life" (5:39). Thirdly, because the door keeps the wolf
+from entering; so Sacred Scripture keeps heretics from harming the faithful:
+"Every scripture inspired by God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof,
+for correction" (2 Tim 3:16). So, the one who does not enter by the door is the
+one who does not enter by Sacred Scripture to teach the people. Our Lord says
+of such: "In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of
+men" (Matt 15:9); "You have made void the word of God" (Matt 15:6). This, then,
+is the mark of the thief: he does not enter by the door, but in some other way. <a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">[1]</a>
+<p>He adds that the thief <b>climbs</b>,
+and this is appropriate to this parable because thieves climb the walls,
+instead of entering by the door, and drop into the sheepfold. It also corresponds
+to the truth, because the reason why some teach what conflicts with Sacred
+Scripture is due to pride: "If any one teaches otherwise and does not agree
+with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching which accords
+with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit, he knows nothing" (1 Tim 6:3).
+Referring to this he says that such a person <b>climbs</b>, that is, through
+pride. The one who <b>climbs in by another way, that man is a thief</b>,
+because he snatches what is not his, <b>and a robber</b>, because he kills what
+he snatches: "If thieves came to you, if plunderers by night - how you have
+been destroyed" (Obad v 5).
+<p>According to this explanation, the
+relation with what preceded is made in this way: Since our Lord had said, "If
+you were blind, you would have no guilt," the Jews might have answered: "We do
+not believe you, but this is not due to our blindness. It is because of your
+own error that we have turned away from you." And so our Lord rejects this, and
+wishes to show that he is not in error because he enters by the door, by Sacred
+Scripture, that is, he teaches what is contained in Sacred Scripture.
+<p>1367 Against this interpretation is the fact that when our
+Lord explains this further on, he says, <b>I am the door</b>. So it seems that
+we should understand the door to be Christ. In answer to this, Chrysostom says
+that in this parable our Lord refers to himself both as the door and the
+shepherd; but this is from different points of view, because a door and a
+shepherd are different.<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">[2]</a>
+Now aside from Christ nothing is more fittingly called a door than Sacred
+Scripture, for the reasons given above. Therefore, Sacred Scripture is
+fittingly called a door.
+<p>1368 According to Augustine, the door is Christ, because one
+enters through him: "After this I looked, and lo, in heaven an open door!" (Rev
+4:1). Therefore, any one who enters the sheepfold should enter by the door,
+that is, by Christ, and not by another way.<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3"
+>[3]</a>
+<p>Note that both the sheep and their
+shepherd enter into the sheepfold: the sheep in order to be secure there, and
+the shepherd in order to guard the sheep. And so, if you wish to enter as a
+sheep to be kept safe there, or as a shepherd to keep the people safe, you must
+enter the sheepfold through Christ. You must not enter by any other way, as did
+the philosophers who treated the principle virtues, and the Pharisees who
+established the ceremonial traditions. These are neither sheep nor shepherds
+because, as our Lord says, <b>he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door</b>,
+i.e., does not enter by Christ, <b>but climbs in by another way, that man is a
+thief and a robber</b>, because he destroys both himself and others. For Christ
+and no one else is the door into the sheepfold, that is, the multitude of the
+faithful: "We have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom 5:1);
+"there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved"
+(Acts 4:12).
+<p>According to this exposition, the
+connection with what went before is made in this way: Because they said that
+they could see without Christ - "now that you say, 'We see'" - our Lord shows
+that this is not true, because they do not enter by the door. Thus he says, <b>Truly,
+truly, I say to you�</b>
+<p>It should be noted that just as one
+who does not enter by the door as a sheep cannot be kept safe, so one who
+enters as a shepherd cannot guard the sheep unless he enters by the door,
+namely, by Christ. This is the door through which the true shepherds have
+entered: "And one does not take the honor upon himself, but he is called by
+God, just as Aaron was" (Heb 5:4). Evil shepherds do not enter by the door, but
+by ambition and secular power and simony; and these are thieves and robbers:
+"They set up princes, but without my knowledge," that is, without my approval
+(Hos 8:5). Further, he says such a person <b>climbs in by another way</b>,
+because the door, namely, Christ, since it is small through humility - "Learn
+from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart" (Matt 11:29) - can be entered only
+by those who imitate the humility of Christ. Therefore, those who do not enter
+by the door but climb in by another way are the proud. They do not imitate him
+who, although he was God, became man; and they do not recognize his lowering of
+himself.
+<p>1369 Now he considers the shepherd. First, he mentions the
+mark of the shepherd; secondly, he shows through signs that he is the shepherd
+(v 3).
+<p>1370 The mark of the true shepherd is to enter by the door,
+that is, by the testimony of Sacred Scripture. Thus Christ said: "Everything
+written about me in the Law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be
+fulfilled" (Lk 24:44). He is called a shepherd: "I am not troubled when I
+follow you as my shepherd" [Jer 17:16]; "He rebukes and trains and teaches
+them, and turns them back, as a shepherd his flock" (Sir 18:13).
+<p>But if the door is Christ, as
+Augustine explains it, then in entering by the door, he enters by himself.<a
+href="#_ftn4" name="_ftnref4">[4]</a>
+And this is special to Christ: for no one can enter the door, i.e., to
+beatitude, except by the truth, because beatitude is nothing else than joy in
+the truth. But Christ, as God, is the truth; therefore, as man, he enters by
+himself, that is, by the truth, which he is as God. We, however, are not the
+truth, but children of the light, by participating in the true and uncreated
+light. Consequently, we have to enter by the truth which is Christ: "Sanctify
+them in the truth" (17:17); "If any one enters by me, he will be saved" (10:9).
+If one wishes to enter even as a shepherd, he must enter by the door, that is,
+Christ, according to his truth, will and consent. Thus we read in Ezekiel
+(24:23): "And I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he
+shall feed them." This is like saying: They must be given by me, and not by
+others or themselves.
+<p>1371 Now he mentions the signs of a good shepherd; and there
+are three. The first relates to the gatekeeper, and is that the good shepherd
+is let in by him. As to this he says, <b>to him the gatekeeper opens</b>. This
+gatekeeper, according to Chrysostom, is the one who opens the way to a
+knowledge of Sacred Scripture.<a href="#_ftn5" name="_ftnref5">[5]</a>
+The first one to do this was Moses, who first received and established Sacred
+Scripture. And Moses opened to Christ, because as was said above: "If you
+believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me" (5:46).
+<p>Or, according to Augustine, the
+gatekeeper is Christ himself, because he brings us himself.<a href="#_ftn6"
+name="_ftnref6">[6]</a>
+He says, "He opens himself who reveals himself, and we enter only by his
+grace." "For by grace you have been saved" (Eph 2:8). It does not matter if
+Christ, who is the door, is also the gatekeeper; for certain things are
+compatible in spiritual matters that cannot occur in physical reality. Now
+there seems to be a greater difference between a shepherd and a door than
+between a door and a gatekeeper. Therefore, since Christ can be called both a
+shepherd and a door, as was said, much more so can he be called a door and a
+gatekeeper. But if you prefer that someone other than Moses or Christ be the
+gatekeeper, then consider the Holy Spirit the gatekeeper, as Augustine says.<a
+href="#_ftn7" name="_ftnref7">[7]</a>
+For it is the office of a gatekeeper to open the door, and it says below of the
+Holy Spirit that "He will guide you into all the truth" (16:13). And Christ is
+the door insofar as he is the Truth.
+<p>1372 The second sign relates to the sheep, and it is that
+they obey the shepherd. This is what he says, <b>the sheep hear his voice</b>.
+This is reasonable if the resemblance to a natural shepherd is considered:
+because just as sheep recognize the voice of their shepherd due to familiar
+experience, so righteous believers hear the voice of Christ: "O that today you
+would harken to his voice" (Ps 95:7).
+<p>1373 But what of the fact that many who are Christ's sheep
+did not hear his voice, as Paul; or that some who were not his sheep did here
+it, as Judas? One might reply that Judas was Christ's sheep for that time as to
+his present righteousness. And Paul, when he did not hear the voice of Christ,
+was not a sheep but a wolf; but when the voice of Christ came it changed the
+wolf into a sheep. This reply could be accepted if it were not contrary to a
+statement in Ezekiel (34:4): "The crippled you have not bound up, the strayed
+you have not brought back." It seems from this that even when they were
+crippled and strayed they were sheep. Therefore, one must say that here our
+Lord is speaking of his sheep not only according to their present righteousness
+but even according to their eternal predestination. For there is a certain
+voice of Christ that only the predestined can hear, i.e., "He who endures to
+the end" (Matt 10:22).
+<p>Again, he says, <b>the sheep hear
+his voice</b>, because they might offer as an excuse for their unbelief the
+fact that not only they, but none of the leaders believed in him. So he says in
+answer to this, <b>the sheep hear his voice</b>, as if saying: They do not
+believe because they are not my sheep.
+<p>1374 The third sign is taken from the actions of the
+shepherd. Here he mentions four actions of a good shepherd: the first being
+that he knows his sheep. He says, <b>he calls his own sheep by name</b>, which
+shows his knowledge of and familiarity with his sheep, for we call by name
+those whom we know familiarly: "I know you by name" (Ex 33:17). This is part of
+the office of a shepherd according to: "Be diligent to know the countenance of
+your flock" [Prv 27:23]. This applies to Christ according to his present
+knowledge, but even more so considering eternal predestination, by which he
+knew them by name from eternity: "He determined the number of the stars, he
+gives to all of them their names" (Ps 147:4); "The Lord knows those who are
+his" (2 Tim 2:19).
+<p>The second action of a good
+shepherd is that he <b>leads them out</b>, i.e., he separates them from the
+society of those who are evil: "He brought them out of darkness and gloom" (Ps
+107:14).
+<p>The third is that having separated
+them from evil and having brought them into the sheepfold, <b>he has brought
+out all his own</b>, from the sheepfold. He does this, first, for the salvation
+of others: "I will send survivors to the nations" (Is 66:19); "Behold, I send
+you as sheep in the midst of wolves" (Matt 10:16), so that they can make sheep
+out of the wolves. Secondly, they are to show the direction and way to eternal
+life: "To guide our feet into the way of peace" (Lk 1:79).
+<p>Fourthly, the good shepherd goes
+before his sleep by the example of a good life; so he says, <b>he goes before
+them</b>, although this is not what the literal shepherd does, for he follows,
+as in "I took him from following the ewes" [Ps 78:70]. But the good shepherd
+goes before them by example, "not as domineering over those in your charge but
+being examples to the flock" (1 Pet 5:3). And Christ does go before them: for
+he was the first to die for the teaching of the truth - "If any man would come
+after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me" (Matt
+16:24); and he went before all into everlasting life - "He who opens the breach
+will go up before them" (Mic 2:13).
+<p>1375 Now he considers the effect that both the thief and the
+shepherd have upon the sheep. First, he mentions the effect of the good
+shepherd; secondly, the effect of the wolf and the thief (v5).
+<p>1376 He says, first, that <b>the sheep follow him</b> who
+goes before them. This is easy to see, because subjects follow in the steps of
+their leaders, as is stated: "Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an
+example, that you should follow in his steps" (1 Pet 2:21); "My foot has held
+fast to his steps" (Job 23:11). The sheep follow <b>for they know his voice</b>,
+i.e., they know it and take delight in it: "Let me hear your voice, for your
+voice is sweet" (Song 2:14).
+<p>1377 The effect that the thief has is that the sheep do not
+follow him for very long, but only for a time; so he says, <b>a stranger they
+will not follow</b>, i.e., they do not follow a false and heretical teacher:
+"The children who are strangers have lied to me" [Ps 17:46]. Thus Paul did not
+follow false teachers for long. But <b>they will flee from him</b>, because
+"Bad company ruins good morals" (1 Cor 15:33). They flee <b>for they do not
+know</b>, that is, do not approve of, <b>the voice of strangers</b>, meaning
+their teaching, which spreads stealthily like a cancer.
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><B>LECTURE 2</B>
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>6 This figure Jesus used with them, but they did not
+understand what he was saying to them. 7 So Jesus again said to them, "Truly,
+truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who came before me are
+thieves and robbers; but the sheep did not heed them. 9 I am the door; if any
+one enters by me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10
+The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have
+life, and have it abundantly."<a href="#_ftn8" name="_ftnref8"><b>[8]</b></a></BLOCKQUOTE>
+<p>1378 Here the Evangelist tells why it was necessary to
+explain the above similitude; and this necessity was caused by the failure of
+his listeners to understand. First, he mentions the reason why they failed to
+understand; secondly, he says they failed to understand.
+<p>1379 The cause of their failure to understand was that
+Christ was speaking in figures. The Evangelist says, <b>This figure </b>[<i>proverbium</i>]
+<b>Jesus used with them. </b>A figure [<i>proverbium</i>], properly speaking,
+is the use of one word in place of another, when it is intended that one word
+be understood from its likeness to the other. This is also called a parable [<i>parabola</i>].
+Our Lord spoke in figures, first of all, because of the wicked, in order to
+conceal from them the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: "To you it has been
+given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but for others they are in
+parables" (Lk 8:10). Secondly, because of the good, so that his figures might
+stir them up to make further inquiry. So, after our Lord spoke his figures or
+parables to the crowds, his disciples questioned him in private, as mentioned
+in Matthew (13:10) and Mark (4:10). This is the reason why Augustine says: "Our
+Lord feeds" the believing crowds "with clear words, and stirs up" his disciples
+"with things that are obscure."<a href="#_ftn9" name="_ftnref9">[9]</a>
+<p>1380 The Evangelist discloses their failure to understand
+when he says, <b>but they did not understand what he was saying to them</b>.
+The ignorance which resulted from Christ's figures was both useful and harmful.
+For the good and the just [who tried to understand them] it was useful for
+giving praise to God; for although they did not understand, they believed and
+praised the Lord and his wisdom which was so far above them: "It is the glory
+of God to conceal the word" [Prv 25:2]. But for the wicked, it was a source of
+harm, because, failing to understand, they blasphemed: "But these men revile
+whatever they do not understand" (Jude 10). As Augustine observes, when both
+the good and the wicked hear the words of the Gospel, and neither of them
+understands, the good person says that what was said was true and good, but
+that he does not understand it. Such a person is knocking and deserves to have
+the door opened, provided he perseveres. But the wicked person says that what
+was said had no meaning or was evil.<a href="#_ftn10" name="_ftnref10">[10]</a>
+<p>1381 Now our Lord explains the similitude. If the above similitude
+is examined correctly, it contains two principal clauses, followed by others.
+The first is: "He who does not enter the sheepfold by the door�is a thief and a
+robber." The second is: "He who enters by the door is the shepherd of the
+sheep." Accordingly, this section is divided into two parts. First, he explains
+the first clause; then the second clause (v 11). Concerning the first he does
+two things: first, he explains the first clause; secondly, he proves it (v 7).
+The first clause mentions a door, a thief and a robber; so first he explains
+the door, then the thief and then the robber (v 8).
+<p>1382 Concerning the first he says, <b>So Jesus again said to
+them</b>, to gain their attention and have them understand the similitude: "The
+man of understanding may acquire skill to understand a proverb and a figure"
+(Prv 1:6). Jesus said, <b>Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door</b>. Now
+the purpose of a door is to conduct one into the inner rooms of a house; and
+this is fitting to Christ, for one must enter into the secrets of God through
+him: "This is the gate of the Lord," that is, Christ, "the righteous shall
+enter through it" (Ps 118:20). He says, <b>I am the door of the sheep</b>,
+because through Christ not only the shepherds are brought into the present
+Church or enter into everlasting happiness, but the sheep also. Thus he says
+below: "My sheep hear my voice�and they follow me; and I give them eternal
+life" (10:27).
+<p>1383 Then when he says, <b>All who came before me are
+thieves and robbers</b>, he explains what he had said about thieves and
+robbers. First, he shows who the thieves and robbers are; secondly, their sign.
+<p>1384 In regard to the first, we should avoid the error of
+the Manicheans, who rejected the Old Testament on the ground that it says here <b>that
+all who came before me are thieves</b>. They maintained that the fathers of the
+Old Testament, who came before Christ, were evil and have been damned.
+<p>The falsity of this view is clear
+from three things. First, from what this parable says. For the statement, <b>all
+who came before me</b>, is intended as a description of the previous statement,
+which mentioned those who do not enter by the door. Therefore, <b>all who came
+before me</b>, but not through me, that is, not entering by the door, <b>are
+thieves and robbers</b>. It is clear that all the patriarchs and prophets, whom
+the Christ-to-come had sent forerunners, entered by the door, i.e., Christ. For
+although he took flesh and became man in time, he was the Word of God from all
+eternity: "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever" (Heb
+13:8). Indeed, the prophets were sent by the Word and Wisdom of God: "In every
+generation she," the Wisdom of God, "passes into holy souls and makes them
+friends of God, and prophets" (Wis 7:27). Accordingly, we expressly read in the
+prophets that the word of God came to this or that prophet, who prophesied by
+participating in the Word of God.
+<p>Secondly, the falsity of the
+teaching of the Manicheans is seen when our Lord says, <b>all who came before
+me</b>, implying that they were thrusting themselves forward on their own
+authority and were not sent by God: "I did not send the prophets, yet they ran"
+(Jer 23:21). Indeed, such prophets have not come from the Word of God: "Woe to
+the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing" (Ez
+13:3). But the fathers of the Old Testament were not of this type, as has been
+said.
+<p>Thirdly, this falsity is seen from
+the fact that he shows what effect their words had, for we read, <b>but the
+sheep did not heed them</b>. Therefore, those whom the sheep did heed were not
+thieves and robbers. Now the people of Israel did listen to the prophets, and
+those who did not heed them were rebuked in Sacred Scripture: "Which of the
+prophets did not your fathers persecute?" (Acts 7:52); "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,
+killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you!" (Matt 23:37).
+<p>1385 Having excluded this error, it must be said that <b>all
+who came before me</b>, that is, independently of me, without divine
+inspiration and authority, and not with the intention of seeking the glory of
+God but acquiring their own, <b>are thieves</b>, insofar as they take for
+themselves what is not theirs, that is, the authority to teach - "Your princes
+are rebels and companions of thieves" (Is 1:23) - <b>and robbers</b>, because
+they kill with their corrupt doctrine - "You make it a den of robbers" (Matt
+21:13); "As robbers lie in wait for a man�they murder on the way" (Hos 6:9). <b>But
+the sheep</b>, that is, the predestined, <b>did not heed them</b>, the thieves
+and robbers, otherwise they would not have been Christ's sheep, because, as was
+said before, "A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him."
+Furthermore, this is commanded in Deuteronomy: "You shall not listen to the
+words of that prophet or to that dreamer of dreams" (13:3).
+<p><br>
+1386 <b>I am the door</b>. Here he clarifies his explanation: first, of the
+door; secondly, of the thief (v 10). Concerning the first, he does two things:
+first, he repeats what he intends to explain; and secondly, he gives the
+explanation (v 9).
+<p>1387 He repeats what he had already said, namely, <b>I am
+the door</b>: "If she is a door, we will enclose her with boards of cedar"
+(Song 8:9), that is, let us grant her an incorruptible power.
+<p>1388 He explains this when he says, <b>if any one enters by
+me, he will be saved</b>. First, he shows that the purpose of a door, which is
+to keep the sheep safe, applies to himself; secondly, he mentions the manner in
+which they are kept safe (v 9b).
+<p>1389 The door safeguards the sheep by keeping those within
+from going out, and by protecting them from strangers who want to come in. And
+this applies to Christ, for he is our safeguard and protection. And this is
+what he says: <b>if any one</b>, not with insincerity, <b>enters</b>, into the
+fellowship of the Church and of the faithful, <b>by me, the door, he will be
+saved</b>, i.e., if he perseveres: "For there is no other name under heaven
+given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12); "We shall be saved by
+his life" (Rom 5:10).
+<p>1390 The way the sheep are safeguarded is set forth when he
+says that <b>he will go in and out and find pasture</b>. This statement can be
+explained in four ways. First of all, according to Chrysostom, it simply
+affirms the security and freedom of those who cling to Christ.<a href="#_ftn11"
+name="_ftnref11">[11]</a>
+For one who enters some other way than by the door does not have free entry and
+exit; but one who does enter by the door has free exit, because he can leave
+freely. Therefore, when he says, <b>he will go in and out</b>, the meaning is
+that the Apostles adhering to Christ enter with security by living with the
+faithful, who are within the Church, and with unbelievers who are outside, when
+they became masters of the whole world and no one wished to cast them out: "Let
+the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh appoint a man over the
+congregation, who shall go out before them and come in before them�that the
+congregation of the Lord may not be as sheep which have no shepherd" (Num
+27:16). <b>And find pasture</b>, find delight in converting others, and find
+joy even when persecuted by unbelievers for the name of Christ: "Then they left
+the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer
+dishonor for the name," as we read in Acts (5:41).
+<p>1391 Secondly, this can be explained as Augustine does in
+his <i>Commentary on John</i>.<a href="#_ftn12" name="_ftnref12">[12]</a>
+Two things are incumbent upon anyone who acts well, namely to be well-ordered
+to the things that are within him, and to those that are without. Within a
+person is the spirit, and without is the body: "Though our outer nature is
+wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed every day" (2 Cor 4:16).
+Therefore, a person who clings to Christ <b>will go in</b> through<b> </b>contemplation,
+to protect his conscience - "When I enter my house," i.e., my conscience, "I
+shall find rest with her," i.e., with wisdom (Wis 8:16) - <b>and out</b>,
+namely, by good actions, to tame the body - "Man goes forth to his work and to
+his labor until the evening" (Ps 104:23) - <b>and find pasture</b>, in a clean
+and sincere conscience - "I will appear before your sight: I will be satisfied
+when your glory appears" [Ps 16:15]. Again, by his actions he will <b>find
+pasture</b>, i.e., fruit - "He shall come home with shouts of joy, bringing his
+sheaves with him" (Ps 126:6).
+<p class=MsoHeader>&nbsp;
+<p>1392 The third explanation is also Augustine's as well as
+that given by Gregory in his <i>Commentary on Ezekiel</i>.<a href="#_ftn13"
+name="_ftnref13">[13]</a>
+The meaning, then, is this. Such a one <b>will go in</b>, i.e., into the
+Church, by believing - "I shall go over into the place of the wonderful
+tabernacle" [Ps 41:5], and this is to enter the Church Militant; <b>and out</b>,
+from the Church Militant into the Church Triumphant - "Go forth, O daughters of
+Zion, and behold King Solomon, with the crown with which his mother crowned him
+on the day of the wedding" (Song 3:11); <b>and find pasture</b>, that is, the
+pastures of doctrine and grace in the Church Militant - "He makes me lie down
+in green pastures"; and the pastures of glory in the Church Triumphant: "I will
+feed them with good pasture" (Ez 34:14).
+<p>1393 Fourthly, there is an explanation found in the work, <i>On
+the Spirit and the Soul</i>, which has been incorrectly attributed to
+Augustine.<a href="#_ftn14" name="_ftnref14">[14]</a>
+Here it is said that such a one <b>will go in</b>, that is, the saints will go
+in to contemplate the divinity of Christ, <b>and out</b>, to consider his
+humanity; and they will <b>find pasture</b> in both, because in both they will
+taste the joys of contemplation: "Your eyes shall see the king in his beauty"
+(Is 33:17).
+<p>1394 Now he considers the thief. First, he mentions the mark
+of the thief; secondly, he says that he himself has the opposite
+characteristic, <b>I came that they may have life</b>.
+<p>1395 He says that those who do not enter by the door, i.e.,
+those who have come independently of me, are thieves and robbers; and they are
+evil. For in the first place, <b>the thief comes only to steal</b>, i.e., to
+usurp what is not his; these are the agitators and heretics, who fasten on to
+those who belong to Christ: "He lies in ambush to catch the ones who are poor"
+[Ps 9:4]. Secondly, the thief comes to kill, and he kills by bringing in
+perverse teachings and evil practices: "As robbers lie in wait for a man�they
+murder on the way" (Hos 6:9). Thirdly, the thief comes to <b>destroy</b>, by casting
+into everlasting destruction: "My people have been lost sheep" (Jer 50:6). But
+these traits are not in me.
+<p>1396 <b>I came that they may have life. </b>This is like
+saying: The above have not come in by me, otherwise they would do as I do. But
+they do the contrary, because they steal, and kill and destroy. <b>I came that
+they may have life</b>, that is, the life of righteousness, by entering into
+the Church Militant through faith: "My righteous one shall live by faith" (Heb
+10:38). We read of this life in 1 John (3:14) that "We know that we have passed
+out of death into life, because we love the brethren." <b>And have it
+abundantly</b>, that is, have eternal life, when they leave the body. We read
+below of this life: "This is eternal life, that they know thee the only true
+God" (17:3).
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><B>LECTURE 3</B>
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>11 "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down
+his life for the sheep. 12 He who is a hireling and not a shepherd, whose own
+the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the
+wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 He flees because he is a hireling and
+cares nothing for the sheep."<a href="#_ftn15" name="_ftnref15"><b>[15]</b></a></BLOCKQUOTE>
+<p>1397 Here he explains the second clause of the parable, "he
+who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep" (10:2). First, he gives
+the explanation; secondly, he makes it clear (v 14). First, he explains that he
+is the good shepherd; secondly, he states the office of a good shepherd (v
+11b); thirdly, he shows that the opposite is found in an evil shepherd (v 12).
+<p>1398 He says, in regard to the first, <b>I am the good
+shepherd</b>. That Christ is a shepherd is clear enough, for as a flock is led
+and fed by the shepherd, so the faithful are nourished by Christ with spiritual
+food, and even with his own body and blood: "For you were straying like sheep,
+but now have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls" (1 Pet 2:25);
+"He will feed his flock like a shepherd" (Is 40:11). To distinguish himself
+from an evil shepherd and thief, he adds, <b>good</b>. Good, I say, because he
+fulfills the office of a shepherd, just as a soldier is called good who
+fulfills the office of a soldier. But since Christ had said above that the
+shepherd enters by the door, and here he says that he is the shepherd, and
+before he said he was the door (v 9), then he must enter through himself. And
+he does enter through himself, because he manifests himself and through himself
+knows the Father. We, however, enter through him, because it is by him that we
+are led to happiness.
+<p>Note that only he is the door,
+because no one else is the true light, but only shares in the light: "He," John
+the Baptizer, "was not the light, but came to bear witness to the light" (1:8).
+But we read of Christ that "He was the true light, which enlightens every man"
+[1:9]. Therefore, no one else refers to himself as a door; Christ reserved this
+for himself. But being a shepherd he did share with others, and conferred it on
+his members: for Peter was a shepherd, and the other apostles were shepherds,
+as well as all good bishops: "I will give you shepherds after my own heart"
+(Jer 3:15). Now, although the Church's rulers, who are her children, are all
+shepherds, as Augustine says, yet he expressly says, <b>I am the good shepherd</b>,
+in order to emphasize the virtue of charity.<a href="#_ftn16" name="_ftnref16"
+>[16]</a>
+For no one is a good shepherd unless he has become one with Christ by love, and
+has become a member of the true shepherd.
+<p>1399 The office of a good shepherd is charity; thus he says,
+<b>the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep</b>. It should be noted
+that there is a difference between a good shepherd and an evil one: the good
+shepherd is intent upon the welfare of the flock, but the evil one is intent
+upon his own. This difference is touched upon by Ezekiel (34:2): "Ho, shepherds
+of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep?"
+Therefore, one who uses the flock only to feed himself is not a good shepherd.
+From this it follows that an evil shepherd, even over animals, is not willing
+to sustain any loss for the flock, since he does not intend the welfare of the
+flock, but his own. But a good shepherd, even over animals, endures many things
+for the flock whose welfare he has at heart. Thus Jacob said in Genesis
+(31:40): "By day the heat consumed me, and the cold by night." However, when
+dealing with mere animals it is not necessary that a good shepherd expose
+himself to death for the safety of the flock. But because the spiritual safety
+of the human flock outweighs the bodily life of the shepherd, when danger
+threatens the safety of the flock the spiritual shepherd ought to suffer the
+loss of his bodily life for the safety of the flock. This is what our Lord
+says, <b>the good shepherd lays down his life</b>, i.e., his bodily life, <b>for
+the sheep</b>, the sheep who are his by authority and charity. Both are
+required, for they must belong to him and he must love them; the first without
+the second is not enough. Furthermore, Christ has given us an example of this
+teaching: "He laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for
+the brethren" (1 Jn 3:16).
+<p>1400 Now he considers the evil shepherd, showing that he
+possesses characteristics contrary to those of the good shepherd. First, he
+mentions the marks of an evil shepherd; secondly, he shows how these marks
+follow one another (v 12). Concerning the first he does two things: first, he
+gives the marks of an evil shepherd; secondly, he mentions the danger which
+threatens the flock because of an evil shepherd: <b>the wolf snatches them and
+scatters them.</b>
+<p>1401 Note that from what has been said about the good and
+evil shepherd, there are three differences in their traits: first in their
+intentions; secondly, in their solicitude; and thirdly in their affections.
+<p>1402 First, they differ in their intentions, and this is
+implied by their very names. For the first is called a good shepherd, and this
+implies that he intends to feed the flock: "Should not shepherds feed the
+sheep?" (Ez 34:2). But the other one, the evil shepherd, is called a hireling,
+as though he were intent on his wages. Thus they differ in this: the good
+shepherd looks to the benefit of the flock, while the hireling seeks mainly his
+own advantage. This is also the difference between a king and a tyrant, as the
+Philosopher says, because when a king rules he intends to benefit his subjects,
+while a tyrant seeks his own interest.<a href="#_ftn17" name="_ftnref17"
+>[17]</a>
+So a tyrant is like a hireling: "If it seems right to you, give me my wages"
+(Zech 11:12).
+<p>1403 But may not even good shepherds seek a wage? It seems
+so, for "Reward those who wait for thee" (Si 36:16); "The Lord God comes�his
+reward is with him" (Is 40:10); "How many of my father's hired servants have
+bread enough and to spare!" (Lk 15:17).
+<p>I answer that wages can be taken in
+a general sense and in a proper sense. In a general sense, a wage is anything
+conferred by reason of merits. And because everlasting life, which is God -
+"This is true God and eternal life" (1 Jn 5:20) - is conferred by reason of
+merits, everlasting life is said to be a wage. And this is a wage that every
+good shepherd can and should seek. In the strict sense, however, a wage is different
+from an inheritance, and a wage is not sought after by a true child, who is
+entitled to the inheritance. A wage is sought after by servants and hirelings.
+Thus, since everlasting life is our inheritance, any one who works with an eye
+towards it is working as a child; but any one who aims at something different
+(for example, one who longs for worldly gain, or takes delight in the honor of
+being a prelate) is a hireling.
+<p>1404 Secondly, they differ in their solicitude. We read of
+the good shepherd that the sheep are his own, not only as a trust, but also by
+love and solicitude: "I hold you in my heart" (Phil 1:7). On the other hand, it
+is said of the hireling, <b>whose own the sheep are not</b>, i.e., the hireling
+has no care for them: "My shepherds have not searched for my sheep, but the
+shepherds have fed themselves" (Ez 34:8).
+<p>1405 Thirdly, they differ in their affections. For the good
+shepherd, who loves his flock, <b>lays down his life </b>for it, i.e., he
+exposes himself to dangers that affect his bodily life. But the evil shepherd,
+because he has no love for the flock, flees when he sees the wolf. Thus he
+says, <b>he sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees</b>. Here, the
+wolf is understood in three ways. First, for the devil as tempting: "What
+fellowship has a wolf with a lamb? No more has a sinner with a godly man" (Si
+13:17). Secondly, it stands for the heretic who destroys: "beware of false
+prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous
+wolves" (Matt 7:15); "I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in
+among you, not sparing the flock" (Acts 20:29). Thirdly, it stands for the
+raging tyrant: "Her princes in the midst of her are like wolves" (Ez 22:27).
+Therefore, the good shepherd must guard the flock against these three wolves,
+so that when he sees the wolf, i.e., the devil tempting, the deceiving heretic
+and the raging tyrant, he can oppose him. Against those who do not, we read,
+"You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of
+Israel" (Ez 13:5).
+<p>Accordingly, we read of the evil
+shepherd that he <b>leaves the sheep and flees</b>: "Woe to my worthless
+shepherd, who deserts the flock" (Zech 11:17). As if to say: You are not a
+shepherd, but only appear to be one: "Even her hired soldiers in her midst are
+like fatted calves; yea, they have turned and fled together, they do not stand"
+(Jer 46:21).
+<p>1406 But in Matthew (10:23) we find the contrary: "When they
+persecute you in one town, flee to the next." Therefore, it seems to be lawful
+for a shepherd to flee. I reply that there are two answers to this. One is that
+given by Augustine in his <i>Commentary on John</i>.<a href="#_ftn18"
+name="_ftnref18">[18]</a>
+There are two kinds of flight: that of the soul and that of the body. When we
+read here, he <b>leaves the sheep and flees</b>, we can understand it to mean the
+flight of the soul: for when an evil shepherd fears personal danger from a
+wolf, he does not dare to resist his injustices but flees, not by running away,
+but by withdrawing his encouragement, refusing to care for his flock.
+<p>This should be the explanation when
+considering the first kind of wolf [the tempting devil], because it is not
+necessary to physically flee from the devil.
+<p>But since sometimes a shepherd does
+flee physically because of certain wolves, such as powerful heretics and
+tyrants, another answer must be given, as found in Augustine's <i>Letter to
+Honoratus</i>.<a href="#_ftn19" name="_ftnref19">[19]</a>
+As he says, it seems lawful to flee, even physically, from the wolves, not only
+because of the authority of our Lord, as cited above, but because of the
+example of certain saints, as Athanasius and others, who fled from their
+persecutors. For what is censured is not the flight itself, but the neglect of
+the flock; so, if the shepherd could flee without abandoning his flock, it
+would not be blameworthy. Sometimes it is the prelate himself who is the one
+sought, and at other times, it is the entire flock. It is obvious that if the
+prelate alone is sought, others can be assigned to guard the flock in his
+territory, and console and govern the flock in his place. So if he flees under
+these circumstances, he is not said to leave the sheep. In this way, it is
+lawful to flee in certain cases. But if the whole flock is sought, then either
+all the shepherds should be with the people, or some should remain while the
+others leave. But if all desert the flock, then these words apply, <b>he sees
+the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees</b>.
+<p>1407 Here he mentions the twofold danger that threatens. One
+is the ravaging of the sheep; so he says, <b>and the wolf snatches them</b>,
+i.e., takes for himself what belongs to another, for the faithful are Christ's
+sheep. Therefore, leaders of sects and wolves snatch the sheep when they entice
+Christ's faithful to their own teachings: "My sheep have become food for all
+the wild beasts" (Ez 34:8). The other danger is that the sheep be scattered; so
+he says, <b>and scatters them</b>, insofar as some are led astray and others
+persevere: "My sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none
+to search or seek for them" (Ez 34:6).
+<p>1408 Now he shows how the above-mentioned marks are related,
+for the third follows from the first two. Since the evil shepherd seeks his own
+advantage and has no love or solicitude for the flock, it follows that he is
+not willing to endure any inconvenience for them. Thus he says of the hireling,
+<b>he flees</b>, for this reason, <b>because he is a hireling</b>, that is, he
+seeks his own advantage, which is the first mark; <b>and cares nothing for the
+sheep</b>, i.e., he does not love them, and is not solicitous for them, which
+is the second mark. So we read in Job (39:16) about the evil shepherd: "She
+deals cruelly with her young, as if they were not hers." The opposite is true
+of the good shepherd, for he seeks the welfare of his flock, and not his own:
+"Not that I seek the gift; but I seek the fruit which increases to your credit"
+(Phil 4:17). Furthermore, he is concerned for his sheep, that is, he loves them
+and is solicitous for them: "I hold you in my heart" (Phil 1:7).
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><B>LECTURE 4</B>
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>14 "I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know
+me, 15 as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for
+the sheep. 16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring
+them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one
+shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life,
+that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my
+own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again;
+this charge I have received from my Father."<a href="#_ftn20" name="_ftnref20"
+><b>[20]</b></a></BLOCKQUOTE>
+<p>1409 Here our Lord proves his explanation. First, he
+restates what he intends to prove; secondly, he gives the proof, <b>I know my
+own</b>�(v 14b); and thirdly, he amplifies on it (v 17).
+<p>1410 He says, <b>I am the good shepherd</b>, which has been
+explained above: "As a shepherd seeks out his flock�so will I seek out my
+sheep" (Ez 34:12).
+<p>1411 Then he says, <b>I know my own</b>, he proves what he
+says. Now he says two things about himself, that he is a shepherd, and that he
+is good. First, he proves that he is a shepherd; secondly, that he is a good
+shepherd.
+<p>1412 He proves he is a shepherd by the two signs of a
+shepherd already mentioned. The first of these is that he calls his own sheep
+by name. Concerning this he says, <b>I know my own</b>: "The Lord knows those
+who are his" (2 Tim 2:19). <b>I know</b>, I say, not just with mere knowledge
+only, but with a knowledge joined with approval and love: "To him who loves us
+and has freed us from our sins" (Rev 1:5). The second sign is that the sheep
+hear his voice and know him. And concerning this he says, <b>and my own know
+me. My own</b>, I say, by predestination, by vocation and by grace. This is
+like saying: They love me and obey me. Thus, we must understand that they have
+a loving knowledge about which we read: "They shall all know me, from the least
+of them to the greatest" (Jer 31:34).
+<p>1413 He shows that he is a good shepherd by mentioning that
+he has the office of a good shepherd, which is to lay down his life for his
+sheep. First, he shows the reason for this; secondly, he gives a sign of it;
+and thirdly, he shows the fruit of his sign.
+<p>1414 The reason for this sign, that is, of his laying down
+his life for his sheep, is the knowledge he has of the Father. Concerning this
+he says, <b>as the Father knows me and I know the Father, and I lay down my
+life for the sheep</b>. This statement can be explained in two ways. In one
+way, so that "as" indicates just a similarity in knowledge; and taken this way,
+such knowledge can be given to a creature: "I shall know even as I am known" [1
+Cor 13:12], i.e., <i>as </i>I am known without obscurity, so I will know
+without obscurity. In another way, the "as" implies an equality of knowledge.
+And then to know the Father as he is known by him is proper to the Son alone,
+because only the Son knows the Father comprehensively, just as the Father knows
+the Son comprehensively: "No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one
+knows the Father except the Son" (Matt 11:27), that is, with a comprehensive
+knowledge. Our Lord says this because in knowing the Father, he knows the will
+of the Father that the Son should die for the salvation of the human race. He
+is also saying here that he is the mediator between God and man. For as he is
+related to the sheep as known by them and as knowing them, so also he is
+related to the Father, because as the Father knows him, so he knows the Father.
+<p>1415 Then when he says, <b>and I lay down my life for the
+sheep</b>, he gives the sign: "By this we know love, that he laid down his life
+for us" (1 Jn 3:16). But since there are three substances in Christ, namely the
+substance of the Word, of the soul, and of the body, one might ask who is
+speaking when he says, <b>I lay down my life</b> ["my life" can also be
+literally translated as "my soul"]. If you say that the Word is speaking here,
+it is not true, because the Word never laid down his soul, since He was never
+separated from his soul. If you say that the soul is speaking, this too seems
+impossible, because nothing is separated from itself. And if you say that
+Christ says this referring to his body, it does not seem to be so, because his
+body does not have the power to take up its soul. Therefore, one must say that
+when Christ died, his soul was separated from his flesh, otherwise Christ would
+not have been truly dead. But in Christ, his divinity was never separated from
+his soul or his flesh; but was united to his soul, as it descended to the lower
+world, and to his body, as it lay in the tomb. And therefore, his body, by the
+power of his divinity, laid down his soul [or life] by the power of his
+divinity, and took it up again.<a href="#_ftn21" name="_ftnref21">[21]</a>
+<p>1416 Then when he says, <b>and I have other sheep</b>, he
+sets down the fruit of Christ's death, which is the salvation not only of the
+Jews but of the Gentiles as well. For since he had said, "I lay down my life
+for the sheep," the Jews, who regarded themselves as God's sheep - "We thy
+people, the flock of thy pasture" (Ps 79:13) - could have said that he laid
+down his life for them alone. But our Lord adds that it is not only for them,
+but for others too: "He prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and
+not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are
+scattered abroad" (11:51).
+<p>1417 In regard to this fruit our Lord does three things.
+First, he mentions the predestination of the Gentiles; secondly, their vocation
+through grace; and thirdly their justification.
+<p>As to the first he says, <b>and I
+have other sheep</b>, that is, the Gentiles, <b>that are not of this fold, </b>i.e.,
+of the family of the flesh of Israel, which was in a way a flock: "I will
+surely gather all of you, O Jacob" (Mic 2:12). For as sheep are enclosed in a
+fold, so the Jews were kept enclosed within the precepts of the Law, as we read
+in Galatians (c 3). These other sheep, I say, that is, the Gentiles, I have
+from my Father through an eternal predestination: "Ask of me, and I will make
+the nations your heritage" (Ps 2:8); "I will give you as a light to the
+nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth" (Is 49:6).
+<p>1418 As to the second he says, <b>I must bring them also</b>,
+i.e., according to the plans of divine predestination it is time to call them
+to grace.
+<p>This seems to conflict with what
+our Lord says in Matthew (15:24): "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the
+house of Israel." I answer that Jesus was sent only to the sheep of the house
+of Israel in the sense of preaching to them personally, as we read in Romans
+(15:8): "Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God's truthfulness,
+in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs." It was through the
+apostles that he brought in the Gentiles: "From them I will send survivors to
+the nations" (Is 66:19).
+<p>1419 In regard to the third he says, <b>and they will heed
+my voice</b>. Here he mentions three things necessary for righteousness in the
+Christian religion. The first is obedience to the commandments of God.
+Concerning this he says, <b>and they will heed my voice</b>, i.e., they will
+observe my commandments: "Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded
+you" (Matt 28:20); "People whom I had not known," i.e., whom I did not approve,
+served me. As soon as they heard of me they obeyed me" (Ps 18:43).
+<p>The second is the unity of charity,
+and concerning this he says, <b>so there shall be one flock</b>, i.e., one
+Church of the faithful from the two peoples, the Jews and the Gentiles: "One
+faith" (Eph 4:5); "For he is our peace, who has made us both one" (Eph 2:14).
+<p>The third is the unity of faith,
+and in regard to this he says, <b>one shepherd</b>: "They shall all have one
+shepherd," that is, the Jews and the Gentiles (Ez 37:24).
+<p>1420 Now our Lord explains his proof: first, he amplifies on
+the reason for the sign [his death for his sheep]; secondly, he explains the
+sign, or the effect (v 18); thirdly, he shows that the reason is appropriate (v
+18b).
+<p>1421 Our Lord says that the reason for his death is the
+knowledge he has of the Father, saying, "as the Father knows me and I know the
+Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep." In explaining this he says, <b>for
+this reason the Father loves me</b>. From this it is clear that the Father
+knows him with a knowledge joined with approval, <b>for this reason</b>, I say,
+<b>because I lay down my life, that I may take it again</b>.
+<p>1422 But is it true that his death is the cause of the
+Father's love? It seems not, because something temporal is not the cause of
+something eternal. But Christ's death is in the temporal order, while the love
+of God for Christ is eternal. I answer that Christ is speaking here of the
+Father's love for him as having a human nature. Accordingly, this passage can
+be understood in three ways. In one way, so that <b>because </b>indicates a
+cause, while in the other way it indicates the term or sign of love.
+<p>If it is taken casually, then the
+meaning is: <b>because I lay down my life</b>, i.e., endure death, <b>for this
+reason the Father loves me</b>, that is, he grants me the effect of his love,
+which is the glory and exaltation of my body: "He humbled himself and became
+obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted
+him and bestowed on him a name which is above every name" (Phil 2:8).
+<p>But one might object to this that
+good works cannot merit the divine love. For since our works are meritorious to
+the extent that they are given life by charity - "If I give away all I have�but
+have not love, I gain nothing" (1 Cor 13:3) - and since God is the first to
+love - "In this is love, not that we love God but that he first loved us" [1 Jn
+4:10] - it is clear that his love precedes all our merit. This can be answered
+by saying that no one can merit God's love; nevertheless, we can merit by our
+good works the effect of God's love, that is, an increase of grace and the
+reception of the good of glory, both of which God bestows on us because of his
+love. Thus we can say that for this reason God loves this or that person, that
+is, bestows on him the effect of his love, because he obeys his commandments.
+And so we can say about Christ as man, that for this reason the Father loves
+him, that is, has exalted him and given him the brightness of glory, because he
+laid down his life in death.
+<p>But if <b>because </b>indicates a
+sign of love, then he meaning is this: <b>for this reason the Father loves me,
+because I lay down my life</b>, as if to say: This is a sign that the Father
+loves me, <b>because I lay down my life, that I may take it again</b>, that is,
+I fulfill his commands and will and endure death. For an obvious sign of love
+is that a person, out of charity, fulfills the commands of God.<a href="#_ftn22"
+name="_ftnref22">[22]</a>
+<p>1423 Now he explains the effect of the sign. And since the
+sign was "I lay down my life for the sheep," he explains how he lays it down.
+First, he excludes violence; secondly, he speaks of his power.
+<p>1424 The violence he excludes is that which could be
+employed in taking a life: such violence was not accomplished in Christ.
+Concerning this he says, <b>no one takes it from me</b>, that is, my life, by
+violence, <b>but I lay it down</b>, by my own power, that is, <b>of my own
+accord</b>: "Can the prey be taken from the mighty?" (Is 49:24).
+<p>But did not the Jews use violence
+against Christ? They did insofar as it was in them; but this violence was not
+in Christ because he laid down his life voluntarily, when he willed. Thus we
+read above (7:30) that the Jews wanted to arrest him but were unable "because
+his hour had not yet come." It was voluntary "not as though he was forced to
+die, but he condescended to be killed," <a
+href="#_ftn23" name="_ftnref23">[23]</a>
+as Augustine says.
+<p>1425 He adds something about his power when he says, <b>I
+have power to lay it down</b>. Apropos of this it should be noted that since
+the union of the soul and body is natural, their separation is natural. And
+although the cause of this separation and death can be voluntary, yet among
+human beings death is always natural. Now nature is not subject to the will of
+any mere human, since nature, as well as the will, are from God. Therefore, the
+death of any mere human person must be natural. But in Christ, his own nature
+and every other nature are subject to his will, just like artifacts are subject
+to the will of the artisan. Thus, according to the pleasure of his will, he
+could lay down his life when he willed, and he could take it up again; no mere
+human being can do this, although he could voluntarily use some instrument to
+kill himself. This explains why the centurion, seeing that Christ did not die
+by a natural necessity, but by his own [will] - since "Jesus cried again with a
+loud voice and yielded up his spirit" (Matt 27:50) - recognized a divine power
+in him, and said: "Truly, this was the Son of God" (Matt 27:54). Again, the
+Apostle says in 1 Corinthians (1:18): "For the word of the cross is folly to
+those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God,"
+that is, his great power was revealed in the very death of Christ.<a
+href="#_ftn24" name="_ftnref24">[24]</a>
+<p>1426 Here he shows that the above-mentioned reason is
+appropriate, for to fulfill a command shows love for the one commanding. Thus
+he says, <b>this charge I have received from my Father</b>, that is, to lay
+down my life and take it up again: "If a man loves me, he will keep my word,
+and my Father will love him" (14:23).
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><B>LECTURE 5</B>
+<BLOCKQUOTE><p>19 There was again a division among the Jews because of
+these words. 20 Many of them said, "He has a demon, and he is mad; why listen
+to him?" 21 Others said, "These are not the sayings of one who has a demon. Can
+a demon open the eyes of the blind?" 22 It was the feast of the Dedication at
+Jerusalem; 23 it was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the
+portico of Solomon. 24 So the Jews gathered round him and said to him, "How
+long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." 25
+Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do
+in my Father's name, they bear witness to me; 26 but you do not believe,
+because you do not belong to my sheep. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know
+them, and they follow me; 28 and I give them eternal life, and they shall never
+perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand. 29 What my Father has
+given to me is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the
+Father's hand. 30 I and the Father are one."<a href="#_ftn25" name="_ftnref25"
+><b>[25]</b></a></BLOCKQUOTE>
+<p>1427 After showing that he has power to give life and
+showing his manner of doing so, our Lord here shows how this power to give life
+belongs to him. First, the Evangelist mentions the dispute which arose among
+the crowd on his point; secondly, he gives the discussion between the Jewish
+leaders and Christ (v 22). Concerning the first he does three things. First, he
+mentions the dispute within the crowd; secondly, he gives the opinion of one
+side; and then states the reasonable position of the other side.
+<p>1428 The dispute arose within the crowd which was listening
+to Christ because of what he said. The Evangelist says, <b>There was again a
+division among the Jews because of these words</b>. Since some of them
+understood his words correctly, and others did not, they argued among
+themselves: "I have not come to bring peace, but a sword," that is, the sword
+of gospel teaching, which some believed and others deny (Matt 10:34). "He pours
+contempt upon princes" (Ps 107:40).
+<p>1429 The opinion of one party to the argument was false.
+About this he says, <b>Many of them said</b>�He says, <b>Many</b>, because as
+we read in Ecclesiastes [1:15]: "The number of fools is infinite." They said, <b>He
+has a demon, and he is mad</b>, for it is the habit of the foolish to always
+give an evil interpretation to matters about which they are in doubt; whereas
+the opposite should be done. Thus they revile whatever they do not know, as we
+read in the letter of Jude. And so because they were incapable of understanding
+our Lord's words - for "the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did
+not comprehend it" [1:5] -they blasphemed, saying, <b>he has a demon, and he is
+mad</b>. And they try to turn others away from him, saying <b>Why listen to
+him?</b>
+<p>These blasphemers accuse Christ of
+two things. First, that he has a demon. As if to say: He is not speaking due to
+the Holy Spirit, but from a wicked spirit. Something similar is found in Acts
+about Paul: "He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities [demons]" (17:18).
+Now the fact is that a person who has his own and familiar demon is always
+spiritually mad, but not always mad in a bodily way. But some can be possessed
+by a demon, and these are always mad even in a bodily way. Thus it was said of
+Christ "He has become mad" (Mk 3:21). Secondly, to show that Christ has a demon
+in this way, they say, <b>and he is mad</b>. "Your great learning is turning
+you mad" (Acts 26:24). Yet their blasphemy is not surprising, because they are
+sensual and, as we read in 1 Corinthians [2:14]: "The sensual person does not
+perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God."
+<p>1430 This opinion is refuted by the statements of the other
+side, and this is in two ways. First, by the profundity of Christ's words. Thus
+he says, <b>Others</b>, that is, those who rightly understood, <b>said, These
+are not the sayings of one who has a demon</b>. This was like saying: It is
+clear from what he is saying that he is not mad, because his words are orderly
+and profound: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life"
+(6:69). And Paul says, "I am not mad, most excellent Festus, but I am speaking
+the sober truth" (Acts 26:25). Secondly, this opinion is refuted by the
+greatness of the miracle worked by Christ. Thus they say,<b> Can a demon open
+the eyes of the blind? </b>This means: Was not this one of the greatest of
+miracles? They were correct in believing that it could be performed only by the
+power of God: "If this man were not from God, he could do nothing" (9:33).
+<p>1431 It should be noted that there are certain "miracles"
+which can be performed by the power of demons and angels, and there are others
+which in no way can be accomplished by their power. Those things which are
+above the order of nature no creature whatever can perform by its own power,
+since the creature itself is subject to the laws of nature. God alone, who is
+above nature, can act above the order of nature. Therefore, whatever any
+creature performs must remain within the order of nature, an angel, either good
+or wicked, is able to do, when it is permitted. Thus, by using the seeds which
+in natural things are ordered to the generation of certain animals, they are
+able to effect the generation of these animals, as Pharaoh's magicians did (Ex
+7:11). Again, they can produce changes affecting the nature of a thing; thus,
+they can heal the sick who could be helped by the power of nature.
+<p>But things that absolutely
+transcend the order of nature can be performed by God alone, or by good angels
+and saintly men through God's power, which they obtain through prayer. Such
+would be the conferring of sight on the blind and the raising of the dead; for
+the power of nature cannot extend to the restoring of sight or to the raising
+of the dead. Consequently, a demon cannot open the eyes of a blind man or raise
+the dead, because this is done by God alone, and by the saints through the
+power of God.
+<p>1432 Here we see the dispute which the Jewish leaders
+initiated with Christ. First, the Evangelist gives the question asked by the
+Jews; secondly, Christ's answer (v 25); and thirdly, the effect of this answer
+(v 31). Concerning the first he does two things: first, he describes the
+circumstances of the questioning; secondly, he gives the question itself (v
+24). The circumstances of the questioning are described with respect to three
+things: the time, the place, and the persons who ask the question.
+<p>1433 He mentions the specific time first, saying, <b>it was </b>(<i>encaenia</i>)
+<b>the feast of the Dedication at Jerusalem</b>. To understand this we have to
+know, as Augustine says, that an "encaenia" was the feast of the dedication of
+a church.<a href="#_ftn26" name="_ftnref26">[26]</a>
+The Greek word, <i>caenos</i>, is the same as the Latin word for "new." Thus an
+<i>encaenia</i> is the same as a renewal; and even in everyday speech, when
+something is dedicated to some use, it is said to be "encaeniated," which is
+the same thing as being renewed. Thus the <i>encaenia</i>, the feast of the
+Dedication, was the feast and commemoration of the dedication of the temple,
+for when we newly dedicate some church to the divine worship, we celebrate its
+being set aside for a sacred purpose; and in memory of this we celebrate it
+every year on the same day. Thus every year the Jews celebrated the <i>encaenia</i>,
+the remembrance of the dedication of the temple.
+<p>1434 To understand why there is a feast for the consecration
+of a church, we should note that all the feasts in the Church are celebrated in
+remembrance of God's blessings: "I will recount the steadfast love of the Lord"
+(Is 63:7). Again in Psalm 117 [v 1], after David called to mind God's many
+blessings, saying, "Give praise to the Lord, for he is good," he adds,
+"Solemnize this day, with shady boughs, even to the horn of the altar" [v 26].
+<p>We recall God's benefits to us as
+being of three kinds. Sometimes, as they are found in our head, the Lord Jesus
+Christ. Thus we celebrate the feast of his birth, and of his resurrection, and
+so on. Sometimes we recall them as found in our fellow members, that is, in the
+saints, who are members of the Church. This is fitting, for as the Apostle
+says: "If one member is honored, all rejoice together" (1 Cor 12:26). Thus we
+celebrate the feasts of Saints Peter and Paul, and the other saints. But at
+times we recall God's benefits as found in the entire Church: for example, the
+benefits of the sacraments and other things granted to the Church in general.
+Now a material church building is like a sign of the gathering of the faithful
+of the Church, and in this building all the sacraments of grace are dispensed.
+So it is in memory of these benefits that we celebrate the feast of the
+dedication of a church. Indeed, such a feast is greater than the feast of any
+saint, just as the benefits conferred upon the whole Church, which benefits we
+celebrate, exceed the benefits conferred on some saint and recalled during his
+feast.
+<p>1435 Recall that the temple at Jerusalem had been
+consecrated three times: first by Solomon (1 Kgs c 8); secondly, during the
+time of Ezra by Zerubbabel and Jesus, the high priest (Ezra c 6); thirdly, by
+the Maccabees, for it says in 1 Maccabees (c 4) that they went up to Jerusalem
+to cleanse the holy places. Now this feast was not celebrated in memory of the
+dedication by Solomon, because that took place in the fall, i.e., in the
+seventh month; nor was it in memory of the dedication made at the time of Ezra,
+for this took place during the spring, i.e., the ninth day of March. But it was
+in memory of the dedication made by the Maccabees, which took place during the
+winter. And so to show this he mentions the specific time, saying, <b>it was
+winter.</b>
+<p>There is also a mystical reason for
+mentioning the time. As Gregory says (<i>Morals</i> 2), the Evangelist took
+care to mention the season as winter in order to indicate the chill of evil in
+the hearts of those listening, that is, the Jews: "As a well keeps its water
+cold, so she keeps cold her wickedness" [Jer 6:7]; and we read of this winter:
+"The winter is past, the rain is over and gone" (Song 2:11).<a href="#_ftn27"
+name="_ftnref27">[27]</a>
+<p>1436 Then he describes the place, <b>and Jesus was walking
+in the temple, in the portico of Solomon</b>. He describes it first in a
+general way, <b>in the temple</b>: "The Lord is in his holy temple" (Ps 11:4);
+secondly, in more detail, saying, <b>in the portico of Solomon</b>. We have to
+know that the temple included not just its main building, but the surrounding
+porticos as well; it was on these porticos that the people stood and prayed,
+for only the priests prayed in the temple. It was called the portico of Solomon
+because it was the place where Solomon stood and prayed when the temple was
+being dedicated: "Then Solomon stood before the altar of the Lord in the
+presence of all the assembly of Israel" (1 Kgs 8:22).
+<p>1437 One might object that the temple which Solomon built
+was destroyed, and so was his portico. I answer that the temple was rebuilt according
+to the specifications of the previous one; and so just as that portico was
+called the portico of Solomon in the first instance, it was called the same
+later out of respect for him.
+<p>1438 The persons who question Christ are described as to
+their malice; thus he says, <b>so the Jews gathered round him</b>, unwarmed by
+loving charity, but burning with the desire to harm him. They came to attack
+him, surrounding and pressing him in on all sides: "Many bulls encompass me"
+(Ps 22:12); "Ephraim has encompassed me" (Hos 11:12).
+<p>1439 Then when he says, <b>and said to him</b>�we see the
+Jews questioning him. First, he mentions the pretended reason for their
+questions when he says, <b>How long will you keep us in suspense?</b> Their
+manner is flattering because they want it to appear that they desire to know
+the truth about him. It is like they were saying: We are hanging in
+anticipation. How long will you keep us unsatisfied? "Hope deferred makes the
+heart sick" (Prv 13:12).
+<p>Secondly, they state their
+question, <b>If you are the Christ, tell us plainly</b>. Note their perversity;
+for since they resent Christ's calling himself the Son of God (5:18), they do
+not ask him if he is the Son of God, but <b>If you are the Christ, tell us
+plainly</b>. They hoped by this to obtain grounds for accusing him before
+Pilate for inciting sedition and making himself king - which was in opposition
+to Caesar and offensive to the Romans. Thus it was that when the Jews accused
+Christ of making himself the Son of God, Pilate was not very impressed; but
+when they said: "Every one who makes himself a king sets himself against
+Caesar" (19:12), he was swayed against Christ. This is why they say, <b>If you
+are the Christ</b>, or a king, or anointed, <b>tell us plainly.</b>
+<p>Secondly, notice their wickedness,
+because they say, <b>plainly</b>. It was like saying: Up to now you have not
+taught in public, but more or less in secret; but in reality, Christ said
+everything openly and was present for the festival days, and said nothing in
+secret: "I have spoken openly to the world�I have said nothing secretly"
+(18:20).
+<p>1440 Now we have the answer of Christ, where he shows their
+unbelief, proving they were deceitful in saying they wished to know the truth
+when they said, "How long will you keep us in suspense?" He shows this in two
+ways. First, because they did not believe his words; and about this he says, <b>I
+told you, and you do not believe</b>. As if to say: You say to me, "If you are
+the Christ," the king, "tell us." But <b>I told you</b>, that is, I told you
+the truth, <b>and you do not believe</b>. "If I tell you, you will not believe"
+(Lk 22:67).
+<p>He shows this in a second way
+because they do not believe his works. And about this he says: <b>the works
+that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness to me</b>. He first shows
+their unbelief in his works; secondly, the reason for their unbelief (v 26).
+<p>1441 As to the first he says, <b>the works that I do</b>�.
+This was like saying: You cannot be persuaded and satisfied by my words, nor
+even by those great works which I do <b>in my Father's name</b>, i.e., for his
+glory. <b>They bear witness to me</b>, because they can be performed by God
+alone. Thus they clearly show that I have come from God: "The tree is known by
+its fruit" (Matt 12:33); "These very works which I am doing, bear witness"
+(5:36). <b>But you do not believe</b>: "Though he had done so many signs before
+them, yet they did not believe in him" (12:37). For this reason they are
+inexcusable: "If I had not done among them the works which no one else did,
+they would not have sin; but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father
+(15:24).
+<p>1442 The reason for their unbelief is that they are
+separated from Christ's sheep. So he says, <b>but you do not believe, because
+you do not belong to my sheep</b>. He does three things concerning this. First,
+he says that they are excluded from membership in the sheep of Christ;
+secondly, he shows the dignity of his sheep (v 27); thirdly, he proves that no
+one will snatch his sheep out of his hands (v 29).
+<p>1443 He mentions that they are not among his sheep when he
+says, <b>you do not belong to my sheep</b>, i.e., you are not predestined to
+believe, but foreknown to eternal destruction. For the very fact that we
+believe is due to God: "For it has been granted to you that for the sake of
+Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake" (Phil
+1:29); "For by grace you have been saved thorough faith; and this is not your
+own doing, it is the gift of God" (Eph 2:8). And this is given only to those
+for whom it was prepared from eternity; thus, only those believe in him who
+have been ordained to this by God through an eternal predestination: "As many
+as were ordained to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48); "We believe that we
+shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 15:11).
+<p>1444 But should anyone be told that he is not predestined?
+It seems that he should not be told: for since no one can be saved unless he is
+predestined, if one is told that he is not predestined, he would be driven to
+despair. And so our Lord was driving the Jews to despair when he said to them, <b>you
+do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep</b>. My answer to this is
+that in this group there was something common to all, that is, they were not
+preordained by God to believe at that time; and there was also something
+special, that is, some of them were preordained to believe later. Thus, some of
+them did believe later, for we read in Acts (c 2) that three thousand of them
+believed in one day. But some were not preordained to do this. Therefore, it
+did not militate against hope to say to a group, some of whom were preordained
+to believe later, that they did not belong to his sheep, because no one of them
+could apply this definitely to himself. But it would militate against hope if
+Christ had said this to some definite person.<a href="#_ftn28" name="_ftnref28"
+>[28]</a>
+<p>1445 Now he reveals the dignity of his sheep when he says, <b>my
+sheep hear my voice</b>. He here mentions four things: two of them are what we
+do in reference to Christ; the other two, which correspond to the first two are
+what Christ does in us.
+<p>1446 The first thing we do is to obey Christ. Concerning
+this he says, <b>my sheep</b>, through predestination, <b>hear my voice</b>, by
+believing and obeying my precepts: "O that today you would harken to his voice!
+Harden not your hearts" (Ps 95:7).
+<p>1447 The second thing, corresponding to this, is what Christ
+does, which is to give his love and approval. Concerning this he says, <b>and I
+know them</b>, that is, I love and approve of them: "The Lord knows those who
+are his" (2 Tim 2:19). This is like saying: The very fact that they hear me is
+due to the fact that <b>I know them</b> by an eternal election.
+<p>But if a person cannot believe
+unless God gives this to him, it seems that unbelief should not be imputed to
+anyone. I answer that it is imputed to them because they are the cause why it
+is not given to them. Thus, I cannot see the light unless I am enlightened by
+the sun. Yet if I were to close my eyes, I would not see the light; but this is
+not due to the sun but to me, because by closing my eyes I am the cause of my
+not being enlightened. Now sin, for example, original sin, and in some persons
+actual sin, is the cause why we are not enlightened by God through faith. This
+cause is in everyone. Thus, all who are left by God are left by reason of the
+just judgment of God, and those who are chosen are lifted up by God's mercy.
+<p>1448 The third thing, which is what we do, concerns our
+imitation of Christ. So he says, <b>and they follow me</b>: "My foot has held
+fast his steps" (Job 23:11); "Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an
+example, that you should follow in his steps" (1 Pet 2:21).
+<p>1449 The corresponding fourth part, which is what Christ
+does, is the bestowing of a reward. Concerning this he says, <b>and I give them
+eternal life</b>. This is like saying: They follow me by walking the path of
+gentleness and innocence in this life, and I will see that afterwards they will
+follow me by entering into the joys of eternal life.
+<p>Our Lord shows in three ways that
+this reward will never end. Something can end in three ways. First of all, by
+its very nature, for example, if it is corruptible. But this reward is incorruptible
+of its very nature. Thus He says, <b>I give them eternal life</b>, which is
+incorruptible and ever-living enjoyment of God: "This is eternal life, that
+they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent" (17:3).
+As Augustine says, this is the pasture which he spoke before (v 9).<a
+href="#_ftn29" name="_ftnref29">[29]</a>
+Indeed, eternal life is called a good pasture because it is entirely verdant
+and nothing withers away. Secondly, a thing can end because the one receiving
+it ends, or does not guard it well. But this will not happen to that reward; so
+he says, <b>and they shall never perish</b>, that is, the sheep will never
+perish. This conflicts with Origen, for he said that the saints in glory are
+able to sin.<a href="#_ftn30" name="_ftnref30">[30]</a>
+Yet our Lord says, <b>they shall never perish</b>, because they will be preserved
+forever: "He who conquers I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God;
+never shall he go out of it" (Rev 3:12). Thirdly, a thing can end by being
+snatched by force: for perhaps Adam would not have been cast out if the
+Deceiver had not been there. But this will not happen in eternal life, and so
+he says, <b>and no one shall snatch them</b>, that is, the sheep, <b>out of my
+hand</b>, that is, from my protection and loyalty: "The souls of the righteous
+are in the hand of God" (Wis 3:1). As Augustine says: "There the wolf does not
+snatch, nor the thief steal, nor the robber kill."<a href="#_ftn31"
+name="_ftnref31">[31]</a>
+<p>1450 He now proves what he had said above about the dignity
+of his sheep, namely, that no one can snatch them from his hand. His reason is
+this: No one can snatch what is in the hand of my Father; but the Father's hand
+and mine are the same; therefore, no one can snatch what is in my hand.
+Concerning this he does three things: first, he gives the minor premise by
+showing that the Father had communicated divinity to him, saying, <b>what my
+Father has given to me</b>, through an eternal generation, <b>is greater than
+all</b>. "For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also
+to have life in himself" (5:26). It is <b>greater</b> than any power: "He has
+given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of man" (5:27);
+it is <b>greater</b> than any reverence and honor: "God had bestowed on him the
+name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should
+bow" (Phil 2:9). Therefore, <b>what my Father has given to me</b>, that is,
+that I am his Word, his only begotten, and the splendor of his light, <b>is
+greater than all</b>.
+<p>Secondly, he mentions the greatness
+of the Father's power, which concerns the major premise, when he says, <b>and
+no one is able to snatch</b>, take by violence or secretly pilfer, <b>out of my
+Father's hand</b>, from the power of my Father, or from me, who am the might of
+the Father - although as Augustine says, it is better to say "from the power of
+the Father" than "from me." <a href="#_ftn32"
+name="_ftnref32">[32]</a>
+Now <b>no one is able to snatch out of my Father's hand</b>, because he is the
+almighty One who is not subject to violence, and he is all-wise from whom
+nothing is hidden: "He is wise in heart, and mighty in strength" (Job 9:4).
+<p>Thirdly, he affirms his unity with
+the Father, and from this the conclusion follows. Thus he says, <b>I and the
+Father are one</b>. As if to say: <b>no one shall snatch them out of my hand</b>,
+because <b>I and the Father are one</b>, by a unity of essence, for the Father
+and the Son are the same in nature.
+<p>1451 This statement rejects two errors: that of Arius, who
+distinguished the essence [of the Father from that of the Son], and that of
+Sabellius, who did not distinguish the person [of the Father from the person of
+the Son]. We escape both Charybdis and Scylla, for by the fact that Christ
+says, <b>one</b>, he saves us from Arius, because if one, then they are not
+different [in nature]. And by the fact that he says, <b>we are</b>, he saves us
+from Sabellius, for if we are, then the Father and the Son are not the same
+[person].
+<p>Yet the Arians, deceived by their
+wickedness, try to deny this, and say that a creature can in some sense be one
+with God, and in this sense the Son can be one with the Father. The falsity of
+this can be shown in three ways. First, from our very manner of speaking. For
+it is clear that "one" is asserted as "being"; thus, just as something is not
+said to be a being absolutely except according to its substance, so it is not
+said to be one except according to its substance or nature. Now something is
+asserted absolutely when it is asserted with no added qualification. Therefore,
+because <b>I and the Father are one</b>, is asserted absolutely, without any
+qualifications added, it is plain that they are one according to substance and
+nature. But we never find that God and a creature are one without some added qualification,
+as in 1 Corinthians (6:17): "He who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit
+with him." Therefore, it is clear that the Son of God is not one with the
+Father as a creature can be.<a href="#_ftn33" name="_ftnref33">[33]</a>
+<p>Secondly, we can see this from his
+previous statement, <b>what my Father has given me is greater than all</b>. He
+draws the conclusion from this: <b>I and the Father are one</b>. This is like
+saying: We are one to the extent that the Father has given me that which is
+greater than all.
+<p>Thirdly, it is clear from his
+intention. For our Lord proves that no one will snatch the sheep from his hand
+precisely because no one can snatch from the hand of his Father. But this would
+not follow if his power were less than the power of the Father. Therefore, the
+Father and Son are one in nature, honor and power.
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<p align=center><B>LECTURE 6</B>
+<p>31 The Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus
+answered them, "I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of
+these do you stone me?" 33 The Jews answered him, "We stone you for no good
+work but for blasphemy; because you, being a man, make yourself God." 34 Jesus
+answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, you are gods'? 35 If he
+called them gods to whom the word of God came (and scripture cannot be broken),
+36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated [sanctified] and sent into the
+world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? 37 If I am
+not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; 38 but if I do them,
+even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and
+understand [believe] that the Father is in me and I am in the Father." 39 Again
+they tried to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands. 40 He went away
+again across the Jordan to the place where John at first baptized, and there he
+remained. 41 And many came to him; and they said, "John did no sign, but
+everything that John said about this man was true." 42 And many believed in him
+there.<a href="#_ftn34" name="_ftnref34"><b>[34]</b></a>
+<p>1452 We have seen the teaching of Christ; and now we see the
+effect this teaching has on the Jews. First, Jesus reproves their fierceness;
+secondly, he defends himself against the charge of blasphemy; and thirdly, he
+escapes from their violence (v 39).
+<p>1453 Concerning the first, two things are done. First, we
+see the violence of the Jews inciting them to stone Christ. The Evangelist
+says, <b>The Jews took up stones again to stone him</b>. They were hard of
+heart and unable to understand his profound message; and so, being like stones,
+they resort to stones: "When I spoke to them they fought against me without
+cause" [Ps 119:7].
+<p>1454 Secondly, we see our Lord reprove their violence,
+saying, <b>I have shown you many good works</b>. First, he reminds them of the
+benefits given to them; secondly, he reproves their violence. He recalls the
+benefits he granted in healing the sick, in teaching them and performing his
+miracles. So he answered them saying, <b>I have shown you many good works</b>,
+by healing, teaching and working miracles - "He has done all things well" (Mk
+7:37) - <b>from the Father</b>, whose glory I have sought in all these things -
+"Yet I do not seek my own glory" (8:50). And he reproves their violence when he
+says, <b>for which of these do you stone me?</b> This was like saying: You
+should honor one who does good to you, not stone him: "Is evil a recompense for
+good?" (Jer 18:20).
+<p>1455 Now our Lord defends himself from the charge of
+blasphemy. First, we see him accused of blasphemy by the Jews; and secondly,
+Christ proves his innocence (v 34).
+<p>1456 With respect to the first, the Evangelist says, <b>The
+Jews answered him, We stone you for no good work but for blasphemy</b>. There
+are five things to be considered here. First, what seems to be the motive for
+their stoning him, namely, his blasphemy. For Leviticus commands that
+blasphemers be stoned: "Bring out of the camp him who has blasphemed; and let
+all who heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let the congregation stone
+him" [24:14]. Mentioning this motive, they say, <b>We stone you for no good
+work but for blasphemy</b>.
+<p>Secondly, they specify his
+blasphemy. It is blasphemy not only to attribute to God what is not appropriate
+to him, but also to attribute to another what belongs to God alone. So, it is
+blasphemy not only to say that God is a body, but also to say that a creature
+can create: "It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (Mk 2:7).
+Thus the Jews were saying that our Lord was a blasphemer not in the first way,
+but for usurping for himself what is proper to God: <b>because you, being a
+man, make yourself God.</b>
+<p>The third thing to be considered is
+that the Jews understood the words of Christ, <b>I and the Father are one</b>,
+better than the Arians did. Thus they were incensed because they understood
+that <b>I and the Father are one</b> could only be said if the Father and Son
+are equal. This is what they say, <b>you make yourself God</b>, claiming by
+your words that you are God, which is not true, you, <b>being a man</b>.
+<p>The fourth point to consider is
+that the distance between God and man is so great that it was unbelievable to
+them that someone with a human nature could be God. So they significantly say, <b>because
+you, being a man, make yourself God</b>. Yet this unbelief could have been
+dispelled by what is read in the Psalm, "What is man that you are mindful of
+him? Or the son of man that you visit him?" [Ps 8:5]; and in Habakkuk (1:5):
+"For I am doing a work in your days that you would not believe if told," this
+is, the work of the incarnation, which surpasses every mind.
+<p>The fifth thing to consider is that
+they do not agree with themselves: for on the one hand, they say that Christ
+does good works, saying, <b>we stone you for no good work</b>; and on the other
+hand, they accuse him of blasphemy, usurping for himself the honor of God. Now
+these conflict with each other, for he could not accomplish miracles from God
+if he blasphemed God, because "A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a
+bad tree bear good fruit" (Mt 7:18). And this applied especially to Christ.
+<p>1457 Here our Lord defends himself against the charge of
+blasphemy. First, he gives his defense; secondly, he shows them the truth (v
+37). He defends himself by divine authority, and so first, he mentions the
+authority of Scripture; secondly, he explains its meaning; and thirdly, he
+draws his conclusion.
+<p>1458 The Evangelist says, <b>Jesus answered them: Is it not
+written in your law</b> (in Psalm 82:6): <b>I said, you are gods?</b> Here we
+should note that "law" is understood in three ways in Scripture. Some times it
+is taken in a general sense for the entire Old Testament, containing the five
+books of Moses, the prophets and the hagiographies. This is the way <b>in your
+law </b>is understood here, meaning in the Old Testament. For this quotation is
+from the psalms which are referred to as the law because the entire Old
+Testament is considered to have the authority of law. Sometimes "law" is
+understood as distinct from the prophets, psalms, and the hagiographies; this
+is the way Luke uses it in "Everything written about me in the law of Moses and
+the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled" (Lk 24:44). Again, at other
+times it is distinguished from the prophets. In this sense the psalms and the
+other books of the Old Testament, other than the Pentateuch, are included
+within the prophets, on the ground that the Old Testament was produced by a
+prophetic spirit. This is the way it is understood in Matthew: "On these two
+commandments depend all the law and the prophets" (Mt 23:40).
+<p>1459 The word "God" is also used in three senses. Sometimes
+it signifies the divine nature itself, and then it is used only in the
+singular: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord" (Deut 6:4). At other
+times it is taken in a denominative sense: in this way idols are called gods:
+"All the gods of the peoples are idols" (Ps 96:5). And sometimes someone is
+called a god because of a certain participation in divinity, or in some sublime
+power divinely infused. In this way, even judges are called gods in Scripture:
+"If the thief is not known, the owner of the house shall be brought to the
+gods," that is, to the judges [Ex 22:8]; "You shall not speak ill of the gods,"
+that is, of the rulers [Ex 22:28]. This is the way the word "god" is taken
+here, when he says, <b>I said, you are gods</b>, i.e., you share in some divine
+power superior to the human.
+<p>1460 Then when he says, <b>If he called them gods to whom
+the word of God came</b>, he shows the meaning of the authority he cited. This
+was like saying: He called them gods because they participated in something
+divine insofar as they participated in God's word, which was spoken to them.
+For due to God's word a person obtains some participation in the divine power
+and purity: "You are already made clean by the word which I have spoken to you"
+(15:3); and in Exodus (c 34) we read that the face of Moses shone when he heard
+the words of the Lord.
+<p>From what has been said above, one
+might argue in this way: It is clear that a person by participating in the word
+of God becomes god by participation. But a thing does not become this or that
+by participation unless it participates in what is this or that by its essence:
+for example, a thing does not become fire by participation unless it
+participates in what is fire by its essence. Therefore, one does not become god
+by participation unless he participates in what is God by essence. Therefore,
+the Word of God, that is the Son, by participation in whom we become gods, is
+God by essence. But our Lord, rather than argue so profoundly against the Jews,
+preferred to argue in a more human way. He says, <b>and scripture cannot be
+broken</b>, in order to show the irrefutable truth of Scripture: "O Lord, your
+word endures forever" [Ps 118:89].<a href="#_ftn35" name="_ftnref35">[35]</a>
+<p>1461 Then when he says, <b>do you say of him whom the Father
+sanctified and sent into the world, You are blaspheming</b>, he draws his
+conclusion. If, with Hilary, we refer this to Christ insofar as he has a human
+nature, the meaning is this: Some people are called gods only because they
+participate in God's word. How then can you say, <b>you are blaspheming</b>,
+that is, how can you consider it blasphemy, if that man who is united in person
+to the Word of God is called God? <a
+href="#_ftn36" name="_ftnref36">[36]</a>
+This is why he says, <b>whom the Father sanctified</b>. For although God
+sanctifies all who are sanctified - "Sanctify them in truth" (17:17) - he
+sanctified Christ in a special way. He sanctifies others to be adopted children
+- "You have received the spirit of adoption" (Rom 8:15) - but he sanctified
+Christ to be the Son of God by nature, united in person to the Word of God.
+These words, <b>whom the Father sanctified</b>, show this in two ways. For if
+God sanctifies as Father, it is clear that he sanctifies Christ as his Son: "He
+was predestined to be the Son of God by the Spirit of sanctification" [Rom
+1:4]. We can also see this by his saying, <b>and sent into the world</b>. For
+it is not fitting for a thing to be sent some place unless it existed before it
+was sent there. Therefore, he whom the Father sent into the world in a visible
+way, is the Son of God, who existed before he was visible: for as we saw above,
+"He was in the world, and the world was made through him" (1:10); and "God sent
+the Son into the world" (3:17). <b>Do you say of him whom the Father sent into
+the world, you are blaspheming, because I said, I am the Son of God? </b>This
+was like saying: I, who am united in person to the Word, have much more reason
+to say this than those <b>to whom the word of God came</b>.
+<p>1462 But how did the Jews realize that he was claiming to be
+the Son of God? Our Lord did not say this expressly. I answer that although our
+Lord did not say this expressly, yet from what he did say - <b>I and the Father
+are one and what my Father has given to me is greater than all </b>- they
+understood that he received his nature from the Father and was one in nature
+with him. But to receive the same nature from another, and to be it, is to be a
+son.
+<p>1463 But if, with Augustine, we refer <b>him whom the Father
+sanctified</b> to Christ as God, then the meaning is this: <b>him whom the
+Father sanctified </b>is he whom he has begotten holy, or sanctified, from
+eternity.<a href="#_ftn37" name="_ftnref37">[37]</a>
+The other things which follow should be explained in the same way as Hilary
+does. Yet the better explanation is to refer everything to Christ as man.
+<p>1464 Then when he says, <b>If I am not doing the works of my
+Father, then do not believe me</b>, he proves the truth of the foregoing. This
+is like saying: Although in your opinion I am only human, yet I am not
+blaspheming when I say that I am truly God, because I truly am. He does two
+things concerning this: first, he presents the argument of his works; secondly,
+he draws his conclusion (v 38b).
+<p>1465 He does two things concerning the first. In the first
+place he says that in the absence of his works they would have an excuse. He
+says, <b>If I am not doing the works of my Father</b>, i.e., the same ones that
+he does, and with the same might and power, <b>then do not believe me</b>.
+"Whatever he [the Father] does, that the Son does likewise" (5:19).
+<p>Secondly, he says that they are
+convicted by his very works: <b>but if I do them</b>, the same works the Father
+does, then <b>even though you do not believe me</b>, who appears as a son of
+man, <b>believe the works</b>, i.e., these works show that I am the Son of God:
+"If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not
+have sin" (15:24).
+<p>1466 Now he draws his conclusion, saying, <b>that you may
+know and believe that the Father is in me and I am in the Father</b>. For the
+clearest indication of the nature of a thing is taken from its works.
+Therefore, from the fact that he does the works of God it can be clearly known
+and believed that Christ is God. Accordingly he says: I will argue from my
+works themselves, <b>that you may know and believe</b> what you cannot see with
+your own eyes, that is, <b>that the Father is in me and I am in the Father</b>:
+"I am in the Father and the Father in me," by a unity of essence (14:10). <b>The
+Father is in me and I am in the Father </b>and "I and the Father are one," have
+the same meaning.
+<p>Hilary explains this well by saying
+that there is this difference between God and man: man being a composite, is
+not his own nature; but God, being entirely simple, is his own existence and
+his own nature. Therefore, in whomever the nature of God is, there is God.<a
+href="#_ftn38" name="_ftnref38">[38]</a>
+And so, since the Father is God and the Son is God, where the nature of the
+Father is, there is the Father, and where the nature of the Son is, there is
+the Son. Therefore, since the nature of the Father is in the Son, and
+conversely, the Father is in the Son, and conversely. But as Augustine remarks,
+although God is in man and man is in God - "He who abides in love abides in
+God, and God abides in him" (1 Jn 4:16) - this does not mean that they are one
+in essence. Rather, man is in God, that is, under the divine care and protection,
+and God is in man, by the likeness of his grace.<a href="#_ftn39"
+name="_ftnref39">[39]</a>
+However, the only Son is in the Father and the Father is in him as equals.
+<p>1467 Now our Lord turns away from the obstinacy of the Jews.
+First, the Evangelist shows they were obstinate; secondly, we see that Christ
+turns away from this; thirdly, we see what effect this had.
+<p>1468 The Evangelist shows their inflexibility by the fact
+that after so many confirmations of the truth, after the evidence of so many
+miracles and wonders, they still persist in their evil. So <b>again they tried
+to arrest him</b>, to apprehend him, not in order to believe and understand,
+but in their rage to do him harm; they were even the more enraged because he
+had more clearly expressed his equality with the Father: "They hold fast to deceit,
+they refuse to return" (Jer 8:5).
+<p>1469 But our Lord turns away from their rage, and so the
+Evangelist says, <b>but he escaped from their hands</b>. Here we see, first,
+that he left them by escaping from their hands. He did this for two reasons. To
+show that he could not be restrained unless he willed: "Passing through the
+midst of them he went away" (Lk 4:30); "No one takes it from me, but I lay it
+down of my own accord" (10:18). Secondly, to give us the example of turning
+away from persecution when this can be done without endangering the faith: "Do
+not make your stand against one who can injure you" [Sir 8:14].
+<p>We see, secondly, where he went
+when the Evangelist says, <b>he went away again across the Jordan to the place
+where John at first baptized</b>. The mystical reason for this is that at some
+time, through the apostles, Jesus would go to convert the Gentiles. The literal
+reason is twofold. First, this place was near Jerusalem, and since his passion
+was near, he did not wish to be too far away. Secondly, he wanted to recall the
+witness which John had given there, when he said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who
+takes away the sin of the world" (1:29), as well as the Father's testimony to
+his Son, Christ, at the time of his baptism.
+<p>1470 The effect of this turning away was that many were
+converted to the faith. Three points are made about this conversion. First,
+many imitated his works; so he says, <b>and many came to him</b>, namely, by
+imitating his works: "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will
+give you rest" (Matt 11:28). Secondly, many professed him in word, <b>and they
+said, John did no sign</b>. By this they profess Christ's superiority to John.
+The reason for this was that John was sent as a witness to Christ; thus he
+should show that he was worthy to be believed and his testimony would be shown
+to be true. Now this is fittingly done by holiness of life. On the other hand,
+Christ came as God; consequently, it was fitting that he show the signs of
+divine power. And so John stood out by the sanctity of his life; Christ,
+however, in addition to this, performed works which manifested his divine
+power. This was in accord with the practice of the rulers of antiquity that
+when in the presence of a higher power a lesser power did not display the
+insignia of its power. Thus, in the presence of the Dictator, the Consuls took
+down their insignia. So it was not fitting that John, who possessed less power,
+because he was a precursor and witness, should employ the insignia of divine
+power; only Christ should have done this. They profess the truth of John's
+witness to Christ, saying, <b>but everything that John said about this man</b>,
+Christ, <b>was true</b>. They were saying: Although John did no sign, he
+nevertheless said all things truthfully about Christ. Thirdly, he reveals the faith
+in their hearts, saying, <b>and many believed in him there</b>. As Augustine
+remarks, they grasped Christ remaining, whom the Jews wanted to seize waning,
+because through the lamp they had come to the day. For John was that lamp and
+gave testimony to the day.<a href="#_ftn40" name="_ftnref40">[40]</a>
+</div>
+<div><br clear=all>
+<BR><BR><BR>
+<hr align=left size=1 width="33%">
+<div id=ftn1>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a> <i>In
+Ioannem hom</i>., 59, ch. 2; PG 59, col. 324; cf.
+<i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:1-5.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn2>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">[2]</a> Ibid.; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:1-5.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn3>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">[3]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 45, ch. 2, col. 1720; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:1-5.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn4>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref4" name="_ftn4">[4]</a> loc.
+cit; also <i>Tract. in Io</i>., 47, ch. 1, col. 1733; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:11-13.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn5>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref5" name="_ftn5">[5]</a> <i>In
+Ioannem hom</i>., 59, ch. 2; PG 59, col. 324; cf.
+<i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:1-5.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn6>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref6" name="_ftn6">[6]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 46, ch. 2, col. 1728; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:1-5.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn7>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref7" name="_ftn7">[7]</a>  Ibid.; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:1-5.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn8>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref8" name="_ftn8">[8]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 10:10 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae</i>: III, q. 50, a. 1, obj. 3; q. 55, a. 5, obj. 3.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn9>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref9" name="_ftn9">[9]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 45, ch. 6, col. 1721; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:6.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn10>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref10" name="_ftn10">[10]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 45, ch. 7, col. 1722.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn11>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref11" name="_ftn11">[11]</a> <i>In Ioannem hom</i>.,
+59, ch. 3; PG 59, col. 325; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 10:7-10.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn12>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref12" name="_ftn12">[12]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 45, ch. 15, col. 1726-27; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:7-10.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn13>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref13" name="_ftn13">[13]</a> Gregory, <i>Super
+Ezek. Hom, </i>13; cf. <i>Catena Aurea</i>, 10:7-10.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn14>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref14" name="_ftn14">[14]</a> <i>De Spiritu et Anima</i>,
+ch. IX;  PL 40, col. 785.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn15>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref15" name="_ftn15">[15]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 10:11 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae</i>: II-II, q. 184, a. 5; q. 185, a. 4; Jn 12: <i>ST</i> II-II, q.
+185, a. 5, obj. 1.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn16>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref16" name="_ftn16">[16]</a><i>
+Tract. in Io</i>., 46, ch. 1, col. 1727-28; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:11-13.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn17>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref17" name="_ftn17">[17]</a>
+Aristotle.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn18>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref18" name="_ftn18">[18]</a>
+Augustine, <i>Tract. in Io., </i>46, ch. 8, col. 1732; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:11-13.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn19>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref19" name="_ftn19">[19]</a>
+Augustine, <i>Epistola CCXXVII, </i> ch. 2; PL 33, col.
+1014. cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:11-13.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn20>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref20" name="_ftn20">[20]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 10:16 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae</i>: III, q. 35, a. 8, ad 1; Jn 10:17: <i>ST </i>III, q. 5, a. 4, s.
+c.; Jn 10:18: <i>ST </i>III, q. 5, a. 3; q. 47, a. 1, obj. 1; q. 47, a. 2, ad
+1; q. 50, a. 3, obj. 1; q. 53, a. 4, s. c.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn21>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref21" name="_ftn21">[21]</a>
+summa-three substances in Christ; his body and soul were separated at death but
+his divinity remained united to both.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn22>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref22" name="_ftn22">[22]</a> Summa--
+God's love is the cause of human love, but works done in charity merit the
+increase of the effects of God's love.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn23>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref23" name="_ftn23">[23]</a> <i>Tract.,
+in Io.</i>, 31, ch.  5, col. 1638.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn24>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref24" name="_ftn24">[24]</a> summa-Christ's
+entire nature was subject to His will.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn25>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref25" name="_ftn25">[25]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 10:27in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae</i>: I-II, q. 108, a. 4, ad 3; Jn 30: <i>ST </i>III, q. 17, a. 1,
+obj. 5.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn26>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref26" name="_ftn26">[26]</a><i>
+Tract. in Io</i>., 48, ch. 2, col. 1741; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:22-30.<i> </i>
+</div>
+<div id=ftn27>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref27" name="_ftn27">[27]</a> <i>Moralia</i>, II, ch. 2, no. 2; PL 75, col. 555C;  cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:22-30.<i> </i>
+</div>
+<div id=ftn28>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref28" name="_ftn28">[28]</a> 1443,
+1444, Summa-predestination and preordination. He begins to mention
+predestination in 1373, but says more about it here, also 1447, why it is the
+fault of some why it is not given to them to believe.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn29>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref29" name="_ftn29">[29]</a><i>
+Tract. in Io</i>., 48, ch. 5, col. 1742; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:22-30.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn30>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref30" name="_ftn30">[30]</a> Origen
+</div>
+<div id=ftn31>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref31" name="_ftn31">[31]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 48, ch. 6, col. 1743; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:22-30.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn32>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref32" name="_ftn32">[32]</a> <i>Ibid</i>,
+48, ch. 6, col. 1743; cf. <i>Catena Aurea, </i>10:22-30.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn33>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref33" name="_ftn33">[33]</a> Summa,
+Christ is one with the Father absolutely, creatures can only become one with
+God in a qualified sense.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn34>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref34" name="_ftn34">[34]</a>
+St. Thomas refers to Jn 10:36 in the <i>Summa
+Theologiae</i>: III, q. 34, a. 1, s. c.; Jn 10:38: <i>ST</i> III, q. 43, a. 1;
+Jn 10:41: <i>ST</i> III, q. 27, a. 5, ad 3; q. 38, a. 2, obj. 2.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn35>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref35" name="_ftn35">[35]</a>
+Summa-because we become gods by participating in the Word of God, the Word must
+be divine.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn36>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref36" name="_ftn36">[36]</a> <i>De
+Trin</i>., 7, ch. 24; PL 10; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:31-38.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn37>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref37" name="_ftn37">[37]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 48, ch. 10, col. 1745; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:31-38.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn38>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref38" name="_ftn38">[38]</a> Hilary,
+<i>De Trin</i>., 9, ch. 61; PL 10, col. 330B.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn39>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref39" name="_ftn39">[39]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 48, ch. 10, col. 1745; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:31-38.
+</div>
+<div id=ftn40>
+<p><a href="#_ftnref40" name="_ftn40">[40]</a> <i>Tract.
+in Io</i>., 48, ch. 12, col. 1746; cf. <i>Catena
+Aurea, </i>10:39-42.
+</body></html>

Mercurial > hg > Aquinas

comparison john/english/John10.html @ 31:25a799388159