Mercurial > hg > Aquinas
diff john/english/John3.html @ 35:178aed5d2c3c
convert to XML
| author | ht |
|---|---|
| date | Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:05:42 +0000 |
| parents | 25a799388159 |
| children |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/john/english/John3.html Mon Nov 30 21:59:53 2009 +0000 +++ b/john/english/John3.html Mon Nov 30 22:05:42 2009 +0000 @@ -1,1438 +1,2188 @@ -<html> +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> +<meta name="generator" content= +"HTML Tidy for Cygwin (vers 25 March 2009), see www.w3.org" /> +<title></title> </head> -<body style=text-align:justify><blockquote> -<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-size: 60pt">3</span></p> -<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 1</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p>1 There was a certain Pharisee named Nicodemus, a member of the Sanhedrin. 2 He came to -Jesus at night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no -one could perform the signs you perform, unless he had God with him.” 3 Jesus responded -and said to him,</p> -<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“Amen, amen, I say to you,<BR> -unless one is born again,<BR> -he cannot see the kingdom of God.”</p> -<p>4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born again when he is already an old man? Is it -possible for him to return to his mother’s womb and be born all over again?” 5 Jesus replied,</p> -<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“Amen, amen, I say to you,<BR> -unless one is born again of water and the Holy Spirit,<BR> -he cannot enter the kingdom of God.<BR> -6 What is born of flesh is itself flesh;<BR> -and what is born of Spirit is itself spirit.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>423 Above, the Evangelist showed Christ’s power in relation to changes affecting nature; -here he shows it in relation to our reformation by grace, which is his principal subject. -Reformation by grace comes about through spiritual generation and by the conferring of -benefits on those regenerated. First, then, he treats of spiritual generation. Secondly, of the -spiritual benefits divinely conferred on the regenerated, and this in chapter five.</p> -<p>As to the first he does two things. First, he treats of spiritual regeneration in relation to the -Jews. Secondly, of the spreading of the fruits of this regeneration even to foreign peoples, and -this in chapter four. Concerning the first he does two things. First, he explains spiritual -regeneration with words. Secondly, he completes it with deeds (3:22).</p> -<p>As to the first he does three things. First, he shows the need for a spiritual regeneration. -Secondly, its quality (3:4). Thirdly, its mode and nature (3:9). As to the first he does two -things. First, he mentions the occasion for showing this need. Secondly, the need itself for -this regeneration (3:3).</p> -<p>The occasion was presented by Nicodemus; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">There was a certain Pharisee -named Nicodemus. </span>And he describes him as to his person, from the time, and from his -statements.</p> -<p>424 he describes his person in three ways. First, as to his religion, because he was a Pharisee, -hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">There was a certain Pharisee. </span>For there were two sects aniong the Jews: the -Pharisees and the Sadducees. The Pharisees were closer to us in their beliefs, for they -believed in the resurrection, and admitted the existence of spiritual creatures. The Sadducees, -on the other hand, disagree more with us, for they believed neither in the resurrection to come -nor in the existence of spirits. The former were called Pharisees, as being separated from the -others. And because their opinion was the more credible and nearer to the truth, it was easier -for Nicodemus to be converted to Christ. “I lived as a Pharisee, according to the strictest sect -of our religion” (Acts 26:5).</p> -<p>425 As to his name he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">named Nicodemus, </span>which means “victor,” or “the victory of the -people.” This signifies those who overcame the world through faith by being converted to -Christ from Judaism. “This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith” (1 Jn 5:4).</p> -<p>426 Thirdly, as to his rank he says, a <span style="font-weight: bold">member of the Sanhedrin. </span>For although our Lord did -not choose the wise or powerful or those of high birth at the beginning, lest the power of the -faith be attributed to human widsom and power—“Not many of you are learned in the worldly -sense, not many powerful, not many of high birth. But God chose the simple ones of the -world” (1 Cor 1:26)—still he willed to convert some of the wise and powerful to himself at -the very beginning. And he did this so that his doctrine would not be held in contempt, as -being accepted exclusively by the lowly and uneducated, and so that the number of believers -would not be attributed to the rusticity and ignorance of the converts rather than to the power -of the faith. However, he did not will that a large number of those converted to him be -powerful and of high birth, lest, as has been said, it should be ascribed to human power and -wisdom. And so it says, “many of those in authority believed in him” (below 12:42), among -whom was this Nicodemus. “The rulers of the people have come together” (Ps 46:10).</p> -<p>427 Then he describes him as to the time, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">he came to Jesus at night. </span>In regard to -this, it might be noted that in Scripture the quality of the time is mentioned as to certain -persons in order to indicate their knowledge or the condition of their actions. Here an obscure -time is mentioned, <span style="font-weight: bold">at night. </span>For the night is obscure and suited to the state of mind of -Nicodemus, who did not come to Jesus free of care and anxiety, but in fear; for he was one of -those of whom it is said that they “believed in him; but they did not admit it because of the -Pharisees, so that they would not be expelled from the synagogue” (below 12:42). For their -love was not perfect, so it continues, “For they loved the glory of men more than the glory of’ -God.”</p> -<p>Further, night was appropriate to his ignorance and the imperfect understanding he had of -Christ: “The night has passed, and day is at hand. So let us cast-off the works of darkness” -(Rom 13:12); “They have not known or understood; they are walking in darkness” (Ps 81:5).</p> -<p>428 Then he is described from his statements, when he says that Nicodemus said to Jesus: -<span style="font-weight: bold">Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God. </span>Here he affirms Christ’s office as -teacher when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Rabbi, </span>and his power of acting, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">for no one could perform the -signs you perform, unles he had God with him. </span>And in both remarks he says what is true, -but he does not affirm enough.</p> -<p>He is right is calling Jesus <span style="font-weight: bold">Rabbi, </span>i.e., Teacher, because, “You call me Teacher and Lord; and -you do well, for so I am,” as we read below (13:13). For Nicodemus had read what was -written in Joel (2:23): “Children of Sion, rejoice, and be joyful in the Lord your God, because -he has given you a teacher of justice.” But he says too little, because he says that Jesus came -as a teacher from God, but is silent on whether he is God. For to come as a teacher from God -is common to all good prelates: “I will give you shepherds after my own heart, and they will -feed you with knowledge and doctrine,” as it says in Jeremiah (3:15). Therefore, this is not -unique to Christ even though Christ taught in a manner unlike other men. For some teachers -teach only from without, but Christ also instructs within, because “He was the true light, -which enlightens every man” (above 1:9); thus he alone gives wisdom: “I will give you an -eloquence and a wisdom” (Lk 21:15), and this is something that no mere man can say.</p> -<p>429 He affirms his power because of the signs he saw. As if to say: I believe that you have -come as a teacher from God, <span style="font-weight: bold">for no one could perform the signs you perform. </span>And he is -speaking the truth, because the signs which Christ did cannot be worked except by God, and -because God was with him: “He who sent me is with me” (below 8:29). But he says too little, -because he believed that Christ did not perform these signs through his own power, but as -relying on the power of another; as though God were not with him by a unity of essence but -merely by an infusion of grace. But this is false, because Christ performed these signs not by -an exterior power but by his own; for the power of God and of Christ is one and the same. It -is similar to what the woman says to Elijah: “Because of this I know that you are a man of -God” (1 Kgs 17:24).</p> -<p>430 Then when he says that Jesus answered, <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to you</span>, he sets down the -necessity for spiritual regeneration, because of the ignorance of Nicodemus. And so he says, -<span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen</span>. Here we should note that this word, <span style="font-weight: bold">amen</span>, is a Hebrew word frequently -employed by Christ; hence out of reverence for him no Greek or Latin translator wanted to -translate it. Sometimes it means the same as “true” or “truly”; and sometimes the same as “so -be it.” Thus is the Psalms 71 (v 19), 88 (v 53), and 106, where we have, “So be it, so be it,” -the Hebrew has “Amen, amen.” But John is the only Evangelist who duplicates or makes a -twin use of this word. The reason for this is that the other Evangelists are concerned mainly -with matters pertaining to the humanity of Christ, which, since they are easier to believe, need -less reinforcement; but John deals chiefly with things pertaining to the divinity of Christ, and -these, since they are hidden and remote from men’s knowledge and experience, require -greater formal declaration.</p> -<p>431 Next we should point out that at first glance this answer of Christ seems to be entirely -foreign to Nicodemus’ statement. For what connection is there between Nicodemus’ -statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, </span>and the Lord’s reply, -<span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.</span></p> -<p>But we should note, as has already been stated, that Nicodemus, having an imperfect opinion -about Christ, affirmed that he was a teacher and performed these signs as a mere man. And so -the Lord wishes to show Nicodemus how he might arrive at a deeper understanding of him. -And as a matter of fact, the Lord might have done so with an argument, but because this -might have resulted in a quarrel—the opposite of which was prophesied about him: “He will -not quarrel” (Is 42:2)—he wished to lead him to a true understanding with gentleness. As if to -say: It is not strange that you regard me as a mere man, because one cannot know these -secrets of the divinity unless he has achieved a spiritual regeneration. And this is what he -says: <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.</span></p> -<p>432 Here we should point out that since vision is an act of life, then according to the diverse -kinds of life there will be diversity of vision. For there is a sentient life which some living -things share in common, and this life has a sentient vision or knowledge. And there is also a -spiritual life, by which man is made like God and other holy spirits; and this life enjoys a -spiritual vision. Now spiritual things cannot be seen by the sentient: “The sensual man does -not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:14), but they are -perceived by the spiritual vision: “No one knows the things of God but the Spirit of God” (1 -Cor 2:11). So the apostle says: “You did not receive the spirit of slavery, putting you in fear -again, but the spirit of adoption” (Rom 8:15). And we receive this spirit through a spiritual -regenaration: “He saved us by the cleansing of regeneration in the Holy Spirit” (Ti 3:3). -Therefore, if spiritual vision comes only through the Holy Spirit, and if the Holy Spirit is -given through a cleansing of spiritual regeneration, then it is only by a cleansing of -regeneration that we can see the kingdom of God. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of -water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. </span>As if to say: It is not -surprising if you do not see the kingdom of God, because no one can see it unless he receives -the Holy Spirit, through whom one is reborn a son of God.</p> -<p>433 It is not only the royal throne that pertains to a kingdom, but also the things needed for -governing the kingdom, such as the royal dignity, royal favors, and the way of justice by -which the kingdom is consolidated. Hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">he cannot see the kingdom of God, </span>i.e., -the glory and dignity of God, i.e., the mysteries of eternal salvation which are seen through -the justice of faith: “The kingdom of God is not food and drink” (Rom 14:17).</p> -<p>Now in the Old Law there was a spiritual regeneration; but it was imperfect and symbolic: -“All were baptized into Moses, in the cloud and in the sea” (1 Cor 10:2), i.e., they received -baptism in symbol. Accordingly, they did see the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but only -symbolically: “seeing from afar” (Heb 11:13). But in the New Law there is an evident -spiritual regeneration, although imperfect, because we are renewed only inwardly by grace, -but not outwardly by incorruption: “Although our outward nature is wasting away, yet our -inward nature is being renewed day by day” (2 Cor 4:16). And so we do see the kingdom of -God and the mysteries of eternal salvation, but imperfectly, for as it says, “Now we see in a -mirror, in an obscure manner” (1 Cor 13:12). But there is perfect regeneration in heaven, -because we will be renewed both inwardly and outwardly. And therefore we shall see the -kingdom of God in a most perfect way: “But then we will see face to face,” as is said in 1 -Corinthians (13:12); and “When he appears we will be like him, because we will see him as -he is” (1 Jn 3:2).</p> -<p>434 It is clear, therefore, that just as one does not have bodily vision unless he is born, so one -cannot have spiritual vision unless he is reborn. And according to the threefold regeneration, -there is a threefold kind of vision.</p> -<p>435 Note that the Greek reading is not “again,” but <i>anothe, </i>i.e., “from above,” which Jerome -translated as “again,” in order to suggest addition. And this is the way Jerome understood the -saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again. </span>It is as if he were saying: Unless one is reborn once more -through a fraternal generation.</p> -<p>Chrysostoin, however, says that to be “born from above” is peculiar to the Son of God, -because he alone is born from above: “The one who came from above is above all things” -(below 3:31). And Christ is said to be born from above both as to time (if we may speak -thus), because he was begotten from eternity: “Before the daystar I begot you” (Ps 109:3), and -as to the principle of his generation, because he proceeds from the heavenly Father: “I came -down from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me” (below 6:38). -Therefore, because our regeneration is in the likeness of the Son of God, inasmuch as “Those -whom he foreknew he predestined to become conformed to the image of his Son” (Rom -8:29), and because that generation is from above, our generation also is from above: both as -to the time, because of our eternal predestination, “He chose us in him before the foundation -of the world” (Eph 1:4), and as to its being a gift of God, as we read below (6:44), “No one -can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him”; and “You have been saved by -the grace of God” (Eph 2:5).</p> -<p>436 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Nicodemus said to him, </span>he gives the manner of and the reason for -this spiritual regeneration. First, the doubt of Nicodemus is set forth. Secondly, Christ’s -response (v 5).</p> -<p>437 As to the first we should note that as stated in 1 Corinthians (2:14): “The sensual man -does not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God.” And so because Nicodemus -was yet carnal and sensual, he was unable to grasp, except in a carnal manner, the things that -were said to him. Consequently, what the Lord said ,to him about spiritual regeneration, he -understood of carnal generation. And this is what he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">How can a man be born again -when he is already an old man?</span></p> -<p>We should note here, according to Chrysostom, that Nicodemus wanted to object to what was -said by the Savior. But his objection is foolish, because Christ was speaking of spiritual -regeneration, and he is objecting in terms of carnal regeneration. In like manner, all the -reasons brought forth to attack the things of faith are foolish, since they are not according to -the meaning of Sacred Scripture.</p> -<p>438 Nicodemus objected to the Lord’s statement that a man must be born again according to -the two ways in which this seemed impossible. In one way, on account of the irreversibility of -human life; for a man cannot return to infancy from old age. Hence we read, “I am walking -on a path,” namely, this present life, “by which I will not return” (Jb 16:23). And it is from -this point of view that he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">How can a man be born again when he is already an old -man? </span>As if to say: Shall he become a child once more so that he can be reborn? “He will not -return again to his home, and his place will not know him any more” (Jb 7:10). In the second -way, regeneration seemed impossible because of the mode of carnal generation. Forin the -beginning, when a man is generated, he is small in size, so that his mother’s womb can -contain him; but later, after he is born, he continues to grow and reaches such a size that he -cannot be contained within his mother’s womb. And so Nicodemus says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Is it possible for -him to return to his mother’s womb and be born all over again? </span>As if to say: He cannot, -because the womb cannot contain him.</p> -<p>439 But this does not apply to spiritual generation. For no matter how spiritually old a man -might become through sin, accordto the Psalm (31:3): “Because I kept silent, all my bones -grew old,” he can, with the help of divine grace, become new, according to the Psalm (102:5): -“Your youth will be renewed like the eagle’s.” And no matter how enormous he is, he can -enter the spiritual womb of the Church by the sacrament of baptism. And it is clear what that -spiritual womb is; otherwise it would never have been said: “From the womb, before the -daystar, I begot you” (Ps 109:3). Yet there is a sense in which his objection applies. For just -as a man, once he is born according to nature, cannot be reborn, so once he is born in a -spiritual way through baptism, he cannot be reborn, because he cannot be baptized again: -“One Lord, one faith, one baptism,” as we read in Ephesians (4:5).</p> -<p>440 Then we have the answer of Christ. Concerning this he does three things. First, he -answers the arguments of Nicodemus by showing the nature of regeneration. Secondly, he -explains this answer with a reason (v 6). Thirdly, he explains it with an example.</p> -<p>441 He answers the objections by showing that he is speaking of a spiritual regeneration, not -a carnal one. And this is what he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of water and the Holy -Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. </span>As if to say: You are thinking of a carnal -generation, but I am speaking of a spiritual generation.</p> -<p>Note that above he had said, <span style="font-weight: bold">he cannot see the kingdom of God, </span>while here he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">he -cannot enter the kingdom of God, </span>which is the same thing. For no one can see the things of -the kingdom of God unless he enters it; and to the extent that he enters, he sees. “I will give -him a white stone upon which is written a new name, which no one knows but he who -receives it” (Rv 5:5).</p> -<p>442 Now there is a reason why spiritual generation comes from the Spirit. It is necessary that -the one generated be generated in the likeness of the one generating; but we are regenerated -as sons of God, in the likeness of his true Son. Therefore, it is necessary that our spiritual -regeneration come about through that by which we are made like the true Son. and this conies -about by Our having his Spirit: “If any one does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not his” -(Rom 8:9); “By this we know that we abide in him, and he in us: because he has given us of -his Spirit” (1 Jn 4:13). Thus spiritual regeneration must come from the Holy Spirit. “You did -not receive the spirit of slavery, putting you in fear again, but the spirit of adoption” (Rom -8:15); “It is the Spirit that gives life” (below 6:63).</p> -<p>443 Water, too, is necessary for this regeneration, and for three reasons. First, because of the -condition of human nature. For man consists of soul and body, and if the Spirit alone were -involved in his regeneration, this would indicate that only the spiritual part of man is -regenerated. Hence in order that the flesh also be regenerated, it is necessary that, in addition -to the Spirit through whom the soul is regenerated, something bodily be involved, through -which the body is regenerated; and this,is water.</p> -<p>Secondly, water is necessary for the sake of human knowledge. For, as Dionysius says, divine -wisdom so disposes all things that it provides for each thing according to its nature. Now it is -natural for man to know; and so it is fitting that spiritual things be conferred on men in such a -way that he may know them: “so that we may know what God has given us” (1 Cor 2:12). But -the natural manner of this knowledge is that man know spiritual things by means of sensible -things, since all our knowledge begins in sense knowledge. Therefore, in order that we might -understand what is spiritual in our regeneration, it was fitting that there be in it something -sensible and material, that is, water, through which we understand that just as water washes -and cleanses the exterior in a bodily way, so through baptism a man is washed and cleansed +<body style="text-align:justify"> +<blockquote> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style= +"font-size: 60pt">3</span></p> +<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 1</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p>1 There was a certain Pharisee named Nicodemus, a member of the +Sanhedrin. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said to him, +“Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no +one could perform the signs you perform, unless he had God with +him.” 3 Jesus responded and said to him,</p> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“Amen, amen, I say to +you,<br /> +unless one is born again,<br /> +he cannot see the kingdom of God.”</p> +<p>4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born again when +he is already an old man? Is it possible for him to return to his +mother’s womb and be born all over again?” 5 Jesus +replied,</p> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“Amen, amen, I say to +you,<br /> +unless one is born again of water and the Holy Spirit,<br /> +he cannot enter the kingdom of God.<br /> +6 What is born of flesh is itself flesh;<br /> +and what is born of Spirit is itself spirit.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>423 Above, the Evangelist showed Christ’s power in +relation to changes affecting nature; here he shows it in relation +to our reformation by grace, which is his principal subject. +Reformation by grace comes about through spiritual generation and +by the conferring of benefits on those regenerated. First, then, he +treats of spiritual generation. Secondly, of the spiritual benefits +divinely conferred on the regenerated, and this in chapter +five.</p> +<p>As to the first he does two things. First, he treats of +spiritual regeneration in relation to the Jews. Secondly, of the +spreading of the fruits of this regeneration even to foreign +peoples, and this in chapter four. Concerning the first he does two +things. First, he explains spiritual regeneration with words. +Secondly, he completes it with deeds (3:22).</p> +<p>As to the first he does three things. First, he shows the need +for a spiritual regeneration. Secondly, its quality (3:4). Thirdly, +its mode and nature (3:9). As to the first he does two things. +First, he mentions the occasion for showing this need. Secondly, +the need itself for this regeneration (3:3).</p> +<p>The occasion was presented by Nicodemus; hence he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">There was a certain Pharisee named +Nicodemus.</span> And he describes him as to his person, from the +time, and from his statements.</p> +<p>424 he describes his person in three ways. First, as to his +religion, because he was a Pharisee, hence he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">There was a certain Pharisee.</span> For there +were two sects aniong the Jews: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. +The Pharisees were closer to us in their beliefs, for they believed +in the resurrection, and admitted the existence of spiritual +creatures. The Sadducees, on the other hand, disagree more with us, +for they believed neither in the resurrection to come nor in the +existence of spirits. The former were called Pharisees, as being +separated from the others. And because their opinion was the more +credible and nearer to the truth, it was easier for Nicodemus to be +converted to Christ. “I lived as a Pharisee, according to the +strictest sect of our religion” (Acts 26:5).</p> +<p>425 As to his name he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">named Nicodemus,</span> which means +“victor,” or “the victory of the people.” +This signifies those who overcame the world through faith by being +converted to Christ from Judaism. “This is the victory that +overcomes the world, our faith” (1 Jn 5:4).</p> +<p>426 Thirdly, as to his rank he says, a <span style= +"font-weight: bold">member of the Sanhedrin.</span> For although +our Lord did not choose the wise or powerful or those of high birth +at the beginning, lest the power of the faith be attributed to +human widsom and power—“Not many of you are learned in +the worldly sense, not many powerful, not many of high birth. But +God chose the simple ones of the world” (1 Cor +1:26)—still he willed to convert some of the wise and +powerful to himself at the very beginning. And he did this so that +his doctrine would not be held in contempt, as being accepted +exclusively by the lowly and uneducated, and so that the number of +believers would not be attributed to the rusticity and ignorance of +the converts rather than to the power of the faith. However, he did +not will that a large number of those converted to him be powerful +and of high birth, lest, as has been said, it should be ascribed to +human power and wisdom. And so it says, “many of those in +authority believed in him” (below 12:42), among whom was this +Nicodemus. “The rulers of the people have come +together” (Ps 46:10).</p> +<p>427 Then he describes him as to the time, saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">he came to Jesus at night.</span> In regard to +this, it might be noted that in Scripture the quality of the time +is mentioned as to certain persons in order to indicate their +knowledge or the condition of their actions. Here an obscure time +is mentioned, <span style="font-weight: bold">at night.</span> For +the night is obscure and suited to the state of mind of Nicodemus, +who did not come to Jesus free of care and anxiety, but in fear; +for he was one of those of whom it is said that they +“believed in him; but they did not admit it because of the +Pharisees, so that they would not be expelled from the +synagogue” (below 12:42). For their love was not perfect, so +it continues, “For they loved the glory of men more than the +glory of’ God.”</p> +<p>Further, night was appropriate to his ignorance and the +imperfect understanding he had of Christ: “The night has +passed, and day is at hand. So let us cast-off the works of +darkness” (Rom 13:12); “They have not known or +understood; they are walking in darkness” (Ps 81:5).</p> +<p>428 Then he is described from his statements, when he says that +Nicodemus said to Jesus: <span style="font-weight: bold">Rabbi, we +know that you are a teacher come from God.</span> Here he affirms +Christ’s office as teacher when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Rabbi,</span> and his power of acting, saying, +<span style="font-weight: bold">for no one could perform the signs +you perform, unles he had God with him.</span> And in both remarks +he says what is true, but he does not affirm enough.</p> +<p>He is right is calling Jesus <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Rabbi,</span> i.e., Teacher, because, +“You call me Teacher and Lord; and you do well, for so I +am,” as we read below (13:13). For Nicodemus had read what +was written in Joel (2:23): “Children of Sion, rejoice, and +be joyful in the Lord your God, because he has given you a teacher +of justice.” But he says too little, because he says that +Jesus came as a teacher from God, but is silent on whether he is +God. For to come as a teacher from God is common to all good +prelates: “I will give you shepherds after my own heart, and +they will feed you with knowledge and doctrine,” as it says +in Jeremiah (3:15). Therefore, this is not unique to Christ even +though Christ taught in a manner unlike other men. For some +teachers teach only from without, but Christ also instructs within, +because “He was the true light, which enlightens every +man” (above 1:9); thus he alone gives wisdom: “I will +give you an eloquence and a wisdom” (Lk 21:15), and this is +something that no mere man can say.</p> +<p>429 He affirms his power because of the signs he saw. As if to +say: I believe that you have come as a teacher from God, +<span style="font-weight: bold">for no one could perform the signs +you perform.</span> And he is speaking the truth, because the signs +which Christ did cannot be worked except by God, and because God +was with him: “He who sent me is with me” (below 8:29). +But he says too little, because he believed that Christ did not +perform these signs through his own power, but as relying on the +power of another; as though God were not with him by a unity of +essence but merely by an infusion of grace. But this is false, +because Christ performed these signs not by an exterior power but +by his own; for the power of God and of Christ is one and the same. +It is similar to what the woman says to Elijah: “Because of +this I know that you are a man of God” (1 Kgs 17:24).</p> +<p>430 Then when he says that Jesus answered, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to you</span>, he sets down +the necessity for spiritual regeneration, because of the ignorance +of Nicodemus. And so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, +amen</span>. Here we should note that this word, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">amen</span>, is a Hebrew word frequently +employed by Christ; hence out of reverence for him no Greek or +Latin translator wanted to translate it. Sometimes it means the +same as “true” or “truly”; and sometimes +the same as “so be it.” Thus is the Psalms 71 (v 19), +88 (v 53), and 106, where we have, “So be it, so be +it,” the Hebrew has “Amen, amen.” But John is the +only Evangelist who duplicates or makes a twin use of this word. +The reason for this is that the other Evangelists are concerned +mainly with matters pertaining to the humanity of Christ, which, +since they are easier to believe, need less reinforcement; but John +deals chiefly with things pertaining to the divinity of Christ, and +these, since they are hidden and remote from men’s knowledge +and experience, require greater formal declaration.</p> +<p>431 Next we should point out that at first glance this answer of +Christ seems to be entirely foreign to Nicodemus’ statement. +For what connection is there between Nicodemus’ statement, +<span style="font-weight: bold">Rabbi, we know that you are a +teacher come from God,</span> and the Lord’s reply, +<span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again, he cannot +see the kingdom of God.</span></p> +<p>But we should note, as has already been stated, that Nicodemus, +having an imperfect opinion about Christ, affirmed that he was a +teacher and performed these signs as a mere man. And so the Lord +wishes to show Nicodemus how he might arrive at a deeper +understanding of him. And as a matter of fact, the Lord might have +done so with an argument, but because this might have resulted in a +quarrel—the opposite of which was prophesied about him: +“He will not quarrel” (Is 42:2)—he wished to lead +him to a true understanding with gentleness. As if to say: It is +not strange that you regard me as a mere man, because one cannot +know these secrets of the divinity unless he has achieved a +spiritual regeneration. And this is what he says: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">unless one is born again, he cannot see the +kingdom of God.</span></p> +<p>432 Here we should point out that since vision is an act of +life, then according to the diverse kinds of life there will be +diversity of vision. For there is a sentient life which some living +things share in common, and this life has a sentient vision or +knowledge. And there is also a spiritual life, by which man is made +like God and other holy spirits; and this life enjoys a spiritual +vision. Now spiritual things cannot be seen by the sentient: +“The sensual man does not perceive those things that pertain +to the Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:14), but they are perceived by +the spiritual vision: “No one knows the things of God but the +Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:11). So the apostle says: “You +did not receive the spirit of slavery, putting you in fear again, +but the spirit of adoption” (Rom 8:15). And we receive this +spirit through a spiritual regenaration: “He saved us by the +cleansing of regeneration in the Holy Spirit” (Ti 3:3). +Therefore, if spiritual vision comes only through the Holy Spirit, +and if the Holy Spirit is given through a cleansing of spiritual +regeneration, then it is only by a cleansing of regeneration that +we can see the kingdom of God. Thus he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of water and the Holy +Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.</span> As if to say: It +is not surprising if you do not see the kingdom of God, because no +one can see it unless he receives the Holy Spirit, through whom one +is reborn a son of God.</p> +<p>433 It is not only the royal throne that pertains to a kingdom, +but also the things needed for governing the kingdom, such as the +royal dignity, royal favors, and the way of justice by which the +kingdom is consolidated. Hence he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">he cannot see the kingdom of God,</span> i.e., +the glory and dignity of God, i.e., the mysteries of eternal +salvation which are seen through the justice of faith: “The +kingdom of God is not food and drink” (Rom 14:17).</p> +<p>Now in the Old Law there was a spiritual regeneration; but it +was imperfect and symbolic: “All were baptized into Moses, in +the cloud and in the sea” (1 Cor 10:2), i.e., they received +baptism in symbol. Accordingly, they did see the mysteries of the +kingdom of God, but only symbolically: “seeing from +afar” (Heb 11:13). But in the New Law there is an evident +spiritual regeneration, although imperfect, because we are renewed +only inwardly by grace, but not outwardly by incorruption: +“Although our outward nature is wasting away, yet our inward +nature is being renewed day by day” (2 Cor 4:16). And so we +do see the kingdom of God and the mysteries of eternal salvation, +but imperfectly, for as it says, “Now we see in a mirror, in +an obscure manner” (1 Cor 13:12). But there is perfect +regeneration in heaven, because we will be renewed both inwardly +and outwardly. And therefore we shall see the kingdom of God in a +most perfect way: “But then we will see face to face,” +as is said in 1 Corinthians (13:12); and “When he appears we +will be like him, because we will see him as he is” (1 Jn +3:2).</p> +<p>434 It is clear, therefore, that just as one does not have +bodily vision unless he is born, so one cannot have spiritual +vision unless he is reborn. And according to the threefold +regeneration, there is a threefold kind of vision.</p> +<p>435 Note that the Greek reading is not “again,” but +<i>anothe,</i> i.e., “from above,” which Jerome +translated as “again,” in order to suggest addition. +And this is the way Jerome understood the saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">unless one is born again.</span> It is as if he +were saying: Unless one is reborn once more through a fraternal +generation.</p> +<p>Chrysostoin, however, says that to be “born from +above” is peculiar to the Son of God, because he alone is +born from above: “The one who came from above is above all +things” (below 3:31). And Christ is said to be born from +above both as to time (if we may speak thus), because he was +begotten from eternity: “Before the daystar I begot +you” (Ps 109:3), and as to the principle of his generation, +because he proceeds from the heavenly Father: “I came down +from heaven not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent +me” (below 6:38). Therefore, because our regeneration is in +the likeness of the Son of God, inasmuch as “Those whom he +foreknew he predestined to become conformed to the image of his +Son” (Rom 8:29), and because that generation is from above, +our generation also is from above: both as to the time, because of +our eternal predestination, “He chose us in him before the +foundation of the world” (Eph 1:4), and as to its being a +gift of God, as we read below (6:44), “No one can come to me +unless the Father, who sent me, draws him”; and “You +have been saved by the grace of God” (Eph 2:5).</p> +<p>436 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Nicodemus +said to him,</span> he gives the manner of and the reason for this +spiritual regeneration. First, the doubt of Nicodemus is set forth. +Secondly, Christ’s response (v 5).</p> +<p>437 As to the first we should note that as stated in 1 +Corinthians (2:14): “The sensual man does not perceive those +things that pertain to the Spirit of God.” And so because +Nicodemus was yet carnal and sensual, he was unable to grasp, +except in a carnal manner, the things that were said to him. +Consequently, what the Lord said ,to him about spiritual +regeneration, he understood of carnal generation. And this is what +he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">How can a man be born +again when he is already an old man?</span></p> +<p>We should note here, according to Chrysostom, that Nicodemus +wanted to object to what was said by the Savior. But his objection +is foolish, because Christ was speaking of spiritual regeneration, +and he is objecting in terms of carnal regeneration. In like +manner, all the reasons brought forth to attack the things of faith +are foolish, since they are not according to the meaning of Sacred +Scripture.</p> +<p>438 Nicodemus objected to the Lord’s statement that a man +must be born again according to the two ways in which this seemed +impossible. In one way, on account of the irreversibility of human +life; for a man cannot return to infancy from old age. Hence we +read, “I am walking on a path,” namely, this present +life, “by which I will not return” (Jb 16:23). And it +is from this point of view that he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">How can a man be born again when he is already +an old man?</span> As if to say: Shall he become a child once more +so that he can be reborn? “He will not return again to his +home, and his place will not know him any more” (Jb 7:10). In +the second way, regeneration seemed impossible because of the mode +of carnal generation. Forin the beginning, when a man is generated, +he is small in size, so that his mother’s womb can contain +him; but later, after he is born, he continues to grow and reaches +such a size that he cannot be contained within his mother’s +womb. And so Nicodemus says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Is it +possible for him to return to his mother’s womb and be born +all over again?</span> As if to say: He cannot, because the womb +cannot contain him.</p> +<p>439 But this does not apply to spiritual generation. For no +matter how spiritually old a man might become through sin, accordto +the Psalm (31:3): “Because I kept silent, all my bones grew +old,” he can, with the help of divine grace, become new, +according to the Psalm (102:5): “Your youth will be renewed +like the eagle’s.” And no matter how enormous he is, he +can enter the spiritual womb of the Church by the sacrament of +baptism. And it is clear what that spiritual womb is; otherwise it +would never have been said: “From the womb, before the +daystar, I begot you” (Ps 109:3). Yet there is a sense in +which his objection applies. For just as a man, once he is born +according to nature, cannot be reborn, so once he is born in a +spiritual way through baptism, he cannot be reborn, because he +cannot be baptized again: “One Lord, one faith, one +baptism,” as we read in Ephesians (4:5).</p> +<p>440 Then we have the answer of Christ. Concerning this he does +three things. First, he answers the arguments of Nicodemus by +showing the nature of regeneration. Secondly, he explains this +answer with a reason (v 6). Thirdly, he explains it with an +example.</p> +<p>441 He answers the objections by showing that he is speaking of +a spiritual regeneration, not a carnal one. And this is what he +says: <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of +water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of +God.</span> As if to say: You are thinking of a carnal generation, +but I am speaking of a spiritual generation.</p> +<p>Note that above he had said, <span style="font-weight: bold">he +cannot see the kingdom of God,</span> while here he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">he cannot enter the kingdom of +God,</span> which is the same thing. For no one can see the things +of the kingdom of God unless he enters it; and to the extent that +he enters, he sees. “I will give him a white stone upon which +is written a new name, which no one knows but he who receives +it” (Rv 5:5).</p> +<p>442 Now there is a reason why spiritual generation comes from +the Spirit. It is necessary that the one generated be generated in +the likeness of the one generating; but we are regenerated as sons +of God, in the likeness of his true Son. Therefore, it is necessary +that our spiritual regeneration come about through that by which we +are made like the true Son. and this conies about by Our having his +Spirit: “If any one does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is +not his” (Rom 8:9); “By this we know that we abide in +him, and he in us: because he has given us of his Spirit” (1 +Jn 4:13). Thus spiritual regeneration must come from the Holy +Spirit. “You did not receive the spirit of slavery, putting +you in fear again, but the spirit of adoption” (Rom 8:15); +“It is the Spirit that gives life” (below 6:63).</p> +<p>443 Water, too, is necessary for this regeneration, and for +three reasons. First, because of the condition of human nature. For +man consists of soul and body, and if the Spirit alone were +involved in his regeneration, this would indicate that only the +spiritual part of man is regenerated. Hence in order that the flesh +also be regenerated, it is necessary that, in addition to the +Spirit through whom the soul is regenerated, something bodily be +involved, through which the body is regenerated; and this,is +water.</p> +<p>Secondly, water is necessary for the sake of human knowledge. +For, as Dionysius says, divine wisdom so disposes all things that +it provides for each thing according to its nature. Now it is +natural for man to know; and so it is fitting that spiritual things +be conferred on men in such a way that he may know them: “so +that we may know what God has given us” (1 Cor 2:12). But the +natural manner of this knowledge is that man know spiritual things +by means of sensible things, since all our knowledge begins in +sense knowledge. Therefore, in order that we might understand what +is spiritual in our regeneration, it was fitting that there be in +it something sensible and material, that is, water, through which +we understand that just as water washes and cleanses the exterior +in a bodily way, so through baptism a man is washed and cleansed inwardly in a spiritual way.</p> -<p>Thirdly, water was necessary so that there might be a correspondence of causes. For the cause -of our regeneration is the incarnate Word: “He gave them power to become the sons of God,” -as we saw above (1:12). Therefore it was fitting that in the sacraments, which have their -efficacy from the power of the incarnate Word, there be something corresponding to the -Word, and something corresponding to the flesh, or body. And spiritually speaking, this is -water when the sacrament is baptism, so that through it we may be conformed to the death of -Christ, since we are submerged in it during baptism as Christ was in the womb of the earth -for three days: “We are buried with him by baptism” (Rom 6:4).</p> -<p>Further, this mystery was suggested in the first production of things, when the Spirit of God -hovered over the waters (Gn 1:2). But a greater power was conferred on water by contact with -the most pure flesh of Christ; because in the beginning water brought forth crawling creatures -with living souls, but since Christ was baptized in the Jordan, water has yielded spiritual -souls.</p> -<p>444 It is clear that the Holy Spirit is God, since he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of water -and the Holy Spirit </span>(<i>ex aqua et Spiritu Sancto</i>).<i> </i>For above (1:13) he says: “who are born not -from blood, nor from the desires of the flesh, nor from man’s willing it, but from God (<i>ex -Deo</i>).” From this we can form the following argument: He from whom men are spiritually -reborn is God; but men are spiritually reborn through the Holy Spirit, as it is stated here; -therefore, the Holy Spirit is God.</p> -<p>445 Two questions arise here. First, if no one enters the kingdom of God unless he is born -again of water, and if the fathers of old were not born again of water (for they were not -baptized), then they have not entered the kingdom of God. Secondly, since baptism is of three -kinds, that is, of water, of desire, and of blood, and many have been baptized in the latter two -ways (who we say have entered the kingdom of God immediately, even though they were not -born again of water), it does not seem to be true to say that <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of -water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.</span></p> -<p>The answer to the first is that rebirth or regeneration from water and the Holy Spirit takes -place in two ways: in truth and in symbol. Now the fathers of old, although they were not -reborn with a true rebirth, were nevertheless reborn with a symbolic rebirth, because they -always had a sense perceptible sign in which true rebirth was prefigured. So according to this, -thus reborn, they did enter the kingdom of God, after the ransom was paid.</p> -<p>The answer to the second is that those who are reborn by a baptism of blood and fire, -although they do not have regeneration in deed, they do have it in desire. Otherwise neither -would the baptism of blood mean anything nor could there be a baptism of the Spirit. -Consequently, in order that man may enter the kingdom of heaven, it is necessary that there -be a baptism of water in deed, as in the case of all baptized persons, or in desire, as in the case -of the martyrs and catechumens, who are prevented by death from fulfilling their desire, or in -symbol, as in the case of the fathers of old.</p> -<p>446 It might be remarked that it was from this statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of water -and the Holy Spirit, </span>that the Pelagians derived their error that children are baptized not in -order to be cleansed from sin, since they have none, but in order to be able to enter the -kingdom of God. But this is false, because as Augustine says in his book, <i>The Baptism of -Children, </i>it is not fitting for an image of God, namely, man, to be excluded from the kingdom -of God except for some obstacle, which can be nothing but sin. Therefore, there must be -some sin, namely, original sin, in children who are excluded from the kingdom.</p> -<p>447 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">What is born of flesh is itself flesh, </span>he proves by reason that it is -necessary to be born of water and the Holy Spirit. And the reasoning is this: No one can reach -the kingdom unless he is made spiritual; but no one is made spiritual except by the Holy -Spirit; therefore, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born again of the Holy -Spirit.</p> -<p>So he says, what is born of flesh (<i>ex carne</i>) is itself flesh, i.e., birth according to the flesh -makes one be born into the life of the flesh: “The first man was from the earth, earthly” (1 -Cor 15:47); <span style="font-weight: bold">and what is born of Spirit </span>(<i>ex Spiritu</i>) , i.e., from the power of the Holy Spirit, -<span style="font-weight: bold">is itself spirit, </span>i.e., spiritual.</p> -<p>448 Note, however, that this preposition <i>ex </i>(from, of, by) sometines designates a material -cause, as when I say: “A knife is made of (<i>ex</i>)<i> </i>iron”; sometimes it designates an efficient -cause, as when I say: “The house was built by (<i>ex</i>)<i> </i>a carpenter.” Accordingly, the phrase, -<span style="font-weight: bold">what is born of </span>(<i>ex</i>)<i> </i>flesh is itself flesh, can be understood according to either efficient or -material causality. As efficient cause, indeed, because a power existing in flesh is productive -of generation; and as material cause, because some camal element in animals makes up the -animal generated. But nothing is said to be made out of spirit (<i>ex spiritu</i>)<i> </i>in a material sense, -since spirit is unchangeable, whereas matter is the subject of change; but it is said in the sense -of efficient causality.</p> -<p>According to this, we can discern a threefold generation. One is materially and effectively -from (<i>ex</i>)<i> </i>the flesh, and is common to all who exist according to the flesh. Another is -according to the Spirit effectively, and according to it we are reborn as sons of God through -the grace of the Holy Spirit, and are made spiritual. The third is midway, that is, only -materially from the flesh but effectively from the Holy Spirit. And this is true in the singular -case of Christ: because he was born deriving his flesh materially from the flesh of his mother, -but effectively from the Holy Spirit: “What she has conceived is of the Holy Spirit” (Mt -1:20). Therefore, he was born holy: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of -the Most High will overshadow you. And so the Holy One who will be born from you, will be -called the Son of God” (Lk 1:35).</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<CENTER><p><B>LECTURE 2</B></p></CENTER> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p style="margin-left: 0.5in">7 “Do not be surprised that I said to you,<BR> -you must be born again.<BR> -8 The wind blows where it wills,<BR> -and you hear its sound, but you do not know<BR> -where it comes from or where it goes.<BR> -So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”</p> -<p>9 “How can all this happen?” asked Nicodemus. 10 Jesus replied: “You are a teacher in Israel -and you do not know these things? -<P style="margin-left: 0.5in">11 “Amen, amen I say to you,<BR> -that we know of what we speak,<BR> -and we bear witness of what we see;<BR> -but you do not accept our testimony.<BR> -12 If I spoke of earthly things,<BR> -and you did not believe me,<BR> -how will you believe if I tell you of heavenly things?<BR> -13 No one has gone up to heaven<BR> -except the One who came down from heaven,<BR> -the Son of Man, who lives in heaven.<BR> -14 Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert,<BR> -so must the Son of Man be lifted up,<BR> -15 so that everyone who believes in him may not be lost,<BR> -but have eternal life.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>449 Above, in his instruction on spiritual generation, the Lord presented a reason; here he -gives an example. For we are led to see that Nicodemus was troubled when he heard that -<span style="font-weight: bold">what is born of Spirit is itself spirit. </span>And so the Lord says to him, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised that -I said to you, you must be born again.</span></p> -<p>Here we should note that there are two kinds of surprise or astonishment. One is the -astonishment of devotion in the sense that someone, considering the great things of God, sees -that they are incomprehensible to him; and so he is full of astonishment: “The Lord on high is -wonderful” (Ps 92:4), “Your testimonies are wonderful” (Ps 118:129). Men are to be -encouraged, not discouraged, to this kind of astonishment The other is the astonishment of -disbelief, when someone does not believe what is said. So Matthew (13:54) says: “They were -astonished,” and further on adds that “They did not accept him.” It is from this kind of -astonishment that the Lord diverts Nicodeintis wheii he proposes an example and says: <span style="font-weight: bold">The -wind</span> (<i>spiritus</i>, wind, spirit)<span style="font-weight: bold"> blows where it wills. </span>In the literal sense, the same words can he -explained in two ways.</p> -<p>450 In the first way, according to Chrysostom, spiritus is taken for the wind, as in Psalm 148 -(v 8): “The winds of the storm that fulfill his word.” According to this interpretation, he says -four things about the wind. First, the power of the wind, when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the wind blows -where it wills. </span>And if you say that the wind has no will, one may answer that “will” is taken -for a natural appetite, which is nothing more than a natural inclination, about which it is said: -“He created the weight of the wind” (Jb 28:25). Secondly, he tells the evidence for the wind, -when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and you hear its sound, </span>where “sound” (<i>vox</i>, voice, sound) refers to the sound -the wind makes when it strikes a body. Of this we read: “The sound (<i>vox</i>) of your thunder was -in the whirlwind” (Ps 76:19).</p> -<p>Thirdly, he mentions the origin of the wind, which is unknown; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but you do not -know where it comes from, </span>i.e., from where it starts: “He brings forth the winds out of his -storehouse” (Ps 134:7). Fourthly, he mentions the wind’s destination, which is also unknown; -so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">or where it goes</span> you do not know, i.e., where it remains.</p> -<p>And he applies this similarity to the subject under discussion, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">So it is with everyone -who is born of the Spirit. </span>As if to say: If the wind, which is corporeal, has an origin which is -hidden and a course that is unknown, why are you surprised if you cannot understand the -course of spiritual regeneration.</p> -<p>451 Augustine objects to this explanation and says that the Lord was not speaking here about -the wind, for we know where each of the winds comes from and where it goes. For “Auster” -comes from the south and goes to the north; “Boreas” comes from the north and goes to the -south. Why, then, does the Lord say of this wind, you do not know where it comes from or -where it goes?</p> -<p>One may answer that there are two ways in which the source of the wind might be unknown. -In one way, in general: and in this way it is possible to know where it comes from, i.e., from -which direction of the world, for example, that Auster comes from the south, and where it -goes, that is, to the north. In another way, in particular: and in this sense it is not known -where the wind comes from, i.e., at which precise place it originated, or where it goes, i.e., -exactly where it stops. And almost all the Greek doctors agree with this exposition of -Chrysostom.</p> -<p>452 In another way, <i>spiritus</i> is taken for the Holy Spirit. And according to this, he mentions -four things about the Holy Spirit. First, his power, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Spirit blows where it wills, -</span>because it is by the free use of his power that he breathes where he wills and when he wills, -by instructing hearts: “One and the same Spirit does all these things, distributing to each as he -wills” (1 Cor 12:11). This refutes the error of Macedonius who thought that the Holy Spirit -was the minister of the Father and the Son. But then he would not be breathing where he -willed, but where he was commanded.</p> -<p>453 Secondly, he mentions the evidence for the Holy Spirit, when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and you hear its -voice: </span>“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps 94:8).</p> -<p>Chrysostom objects to this and says that this cannot pertain to the Holy Spirit. For the Lord -was speaking to Nicodemus, who was still an unbeliever, and thus not fit to hear the voice of -the Holy Spirit. We may answer to this, with Augustine, that there is a twofold voice of the -Holy Spirit. One is that by which he speaks inwardly in man’s heart; and only believers and -the saints hear this voice, about which the Psalm (84:9) says: “I will hear what the Lord God -says within me.” The other voice is that by which the Holy Spirit speaks in the Scriptures or -through those who preach, according to Matthew (10:20): “For it is not you who speak, but -the Holy Splirit who is speaking through you.” And this voice is heard by unbelievers and -sinners.</p> -<p>454 Thirdly, he refers to the origin of the Holy Spirit, which is hidden; thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but you -do not know where it comes from, </span>although you may hear its voice. And this is because the -Holy Spirit comes from the Father and the Son: “When the Paraclete comes, whom I will -send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father” (below 15:26). -But the Father and the Son “dwell in inaccessible light, whom no man has seen or is able to -see” (1 Tim 6:16).</p> -<p>455 Fourthly, he gives the destination of the Holy Spirit, which is also hidden; and so he says, -you do not know where it goes, because the Spirit leads one to a hidden end, that is, eternal -happiness. Thus it says in Ephesians (1:14) that the Holy Spirit is “the pledge of our -inheritance.” And again, “The eye has not seen, nor has the ear heard, nor has the heart of -man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor 2:9).</p> -<p>Or, <span style="font-weight: bold">you do not know where it comes from, </span>i.e., how the Spirit enters into a person, <span style="font-weight: bold">or -where it goes, </span>i.e., to what perfection he may lead him: “If he comes toward me, I will not -see him” (Jb 9:11).</p> -<p>456 <span style="font-weight: bold">So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit, </span>i.e., they are like the Holy Spirit. And -no wonder: for as he had said before, “What is born of Spirit is itself spirit,” because the -qualities of the Holy Spirit are present in the spiritual man, just as the qualities of fire are -present in burning coal.</p> -<p>Therefore, the above four qualities of the Holy Spirit are found in one who has been born of -the Holy Spirit. First of all, he has freedom: “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is -freedom” (2 Cor 3:17), for the Holy Spirit leads us to what is right: “Your good Spirit will -lead me to the right path” (Ps 142:10); and he frees us from the slavery of sin and of the law: -“The law of the Spirit, of life in Christ, has set me free” (Rom 8:2). Secondly, we get an -indication of him through the sound of his words; and when we hear them we know his -spirituality, for it is out of the abundance of the heart that the mouth speaks.</p> -<p>Thirdly, he has an origin and an end that are hidden, because no one can judge one who is -spiritual: “The spiritual man judges all things, and he himself is judged by no one” (1 Cor -2:15). Or, we do not know where such a person comes from, i.e., the source of his spiritual -birth, which is baptismal grace; or where he goes, i.e., of what he is made worthy, that is, of -eternal life, which remains concealed from us.</p> -<p>457 Then the cause and reason for spiritual regeneration are set forth. First, a question is -asked by Nicodemus; secondly, the Lord’s answer is given (v 10).</p> -<p>458 It is apparent from the first that Nicodemus, as yet dull, and remaining a Jew on the level -of sense, was unable to understand the mysteries of Christ in spite of the examples and -explanations that were given. And so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">How can all this happen?</span></p> -<p>There are two reasons why one may question about something. Some question because of -disbelief, as did Zechariah, saying: “How will I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife -is advanced in age” (Lk 1:18); “He confounds those who search into mysteries” (Is 40:23). -Others, on the other hand, question because of a desire to know, as the Blessed Virgin did -when she said to the angel: “How shall this be, since I do not know man?” (Lk 1:34). It is the -latter who are instructed. And so, because Nicodemus asked from a desire to learn, he -deserved to be instructed.</p> -<p>459 And this is what follows: <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus replied. </span>First the Lord chides him for his slowness. -Secondly, he answers his question (v 13).</p> -<p>460 He chides him for his slowness, basing himself on three things. First, the condition of the -person to whom he is speaking, when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">You are a teacher in Israel. </span>And here the -Lord did not chide him to insult him. Rather, because Nicodemus, presuming on his own -knowledge, was still relying on his status as a teacher, the Lord wished to make him a temple -of the Holy Spirit by humbling him: “For whom will I have regard? For he who is humble and -of contrite spirit” (Is 66:2). And he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">You are a teacher, </span>because it is tolerable if a simple -person cannot grasp profound truths, but in a teacher, it deserves rebuke. And so he says, You -are a teacher, i.e., of the letter that kills (2 Cor 3:6), <span style="font-weight: bold">and you do not know these things? </span>i.e., -spiritual things. “For although you ought to be teachers by now, you yourselves need to be -taught again” (Heb 5:12).</p> -<p>461 You might say that the Lord would have rebuked Nicodemus justly if he had spoken to -him about matters of the Old Law and he did not understand them; but he spoke to him about -the New Law. I answer that the things which the Lord says of spiritual generation are -contained in the Old Law, although under a figure, as is said in 1 Corinthians (10:2): “All -were baptized into Moses, in the cloud and in the sea.” And the prophets also said this: “I will -pour clean water upon you, and you will be cleansed from all your uncleanness” (Ez 36:25).</p> -<p>462 Secondly, he rebukes him for his slowness on account of the character of the person who -is speaking. For it is tolerable if one does not acquiesce to the statements of an ignorant -person; but it is reprehensible to reject the statements of a man who is wise and who -possesses great authority. And so he says, Amen, amen I say to you, that we <span style="font-weight: bold">know of what -we speak, and we bear witness of what we see. </span>For a qualified witness must base his -testimony on hearing or sight: “What we have seen and heard” (1 Jn 1:3). And so the Lord -mentions both: <span style="font-weight: bold">we know of what we speak, and we bear witness of what </span>we see. Indeed, -the Lord as man knows all things: “Lord, you know all things” (below 21:17); “The Lord, -whose knowledge is holy, knows clearly” (2 Mc 6:30). Further, he sees all things by his -divine knowledge: “I speak of what I have seen with my Father,” as we read below (8:38).</p> -<p>He speaks in the plural, we know, we see, in order to suggest the mystery of the Trinity: “The -Father, who dwells in me, he does the works” (below 14:10). Or, we know, i.e., I, and others -who have been made spiritual, because “No one knows the Father but the Son, and he to -whom the Son wishes to reveal him” (Mt 11:27).</p> -<p><span style="font-weight: bold">But you do not accept our testimony, </span>so approved, so solid. “And his testimony no one -accepts (below 3:32).</p> -<p>463 Thirdly, he rebukes him for his slowness because of the quality of the things under -discussion. For it is not unusual when someone does not grasp difficult matters, but it is -inexcusable not to grasp easy things. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">If I spoke of earthly things, and you did -not believe, how will you believe if I tell you of heavenly things? </span>As if to say: If you do not -grasp these easy things, how will you be able to understand the progress of the Holy Spirit? -“What is on earth we find difficult, and who will search Out the things in heaven,” as is said -in Wisdom (9:10).</p> -<p>464 But one might object that the above does not show that the Lord spoke of earthly things -to Nicodemus. I answer, according to Chrysostom, that the Lord’s statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">If I spoke of -earthly things, </span>refers to the example of the wind. For the wind, being something which is -generable and corruptible, is regarded as an earthly thing. Or one might say, again according -to Chrysostom, that the spiritual generation which is given in baptism is heavenly as to its -source, which sanctifies and regenerates; but it is earthly as to its subject, for the one -regenerated, man, is of the earth.</p> -<p>Or one might answer, according to Augustine, that we must understand this in reference to -what Christ said earlier: “Destroy this temple,” which is earthly, because he said this about -the temple of his body, which he had taken from the earth.</p> -<p><span style="font-weight: bold">If I spoke of earthly things, and you did not believe, how will you believe if I tell you of -heavenly things? </span>As if to say: If you do not believe in a spiritual generation occurring in -time, how will you believe in the eternal generation of the Son? Or, if you do not believe -what I tell you about the power of my body, how will you believe what I tell you about the -power of my divinity and about the power of the Holy Spirit?</p> -<p>465 <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus replied. </span>Here he answers the question. First, he lays down the causes of spiritual -regeneration. Secondly, he explains what he says (3:16). Now there are two causes of spiritual -regeneration, namely, the mystery of the incarnation of Christ, and his passion. So first, he +<p>Thirdly, water was necessary so that there might be a +correspondence of causes. For the cause of our regeneration is the +incarnate Word: “He gave them power to become the sons of +God,” as we saw above (1:12). Therefore it was fitting that +in the sacraments, which have their efficacy from the power of the +incarnate Word, there be something corresponding to the Word, and +something corresponding to the flesh, or body. And spiritually +speaking, this is water when the sacrament is baptism, so that +through it we may be conformed to the death of Christ, since we are +submerged in it during baptism as Christ was in the womb of the +earth for three days: “We are buried with him by +baptism” (Rom 6:4).</p> +<p>Further, this mystery was suggested in the first production of +things, when the Spirit of God hovered over the waters (Gn 1:2). +But a greater power was conferred on water by contact with the most +pure flesh of Christ; because in the beginning water brought forth +crawling creatures with living souls, but since Christ was baptized +in the Jordan, water has yielded spiritual souls.</p> +<p>444 It is clear that the Holy Spirit is God, since he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of water +and the Holy Spirit</span> (<i>ex aqua et Spiritu Sancto</i>). For +above (1:13) he says: “who are born not from blood, nor from +the desires of the flesh, nor from man’s willing it, but from +God (<i>ex Deo</i>).” From this we can form the following +argument: He from whom men are spiritually reborn is God; but men +are spiritually reborn through the Holy Spirit, as it is stated +here; therefore, the Holy Spirit is God.</p> +<p>445 Two questions arise here. First, if no one enters the +kingdom of God unless he is born again of water, and if the fathers +of old were not born again of water (for they were not baptized), +then they have not entered the kingdom of God. Secondly, since +baptism is of three kinds, that is, of water, of desire, and of +blood, and many have been baptized in the latter two ways (who we +say have entered the kingdom of God immediately, even though they +were not born again of water), it does not seem to be true to say +that <span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of +water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of +God.</span></p> +<p>The answer to the first is that rebirth or regeneration from +water and the Holy Spirit takes place in two ways: in truth and in +symbol. Now the fathers of old, although they were not reborn with +a true rebirth, were nevertheless reborn with a symbolic rebirth, +because they always had a sense perceptible sign in which true +rebirth was prefigured. So according to this, thus reborn, they did +enter the kingdom of God, after the ransom was paid.</p> +<p>The answer to the second is that those who are reborn by a +baptism of blood and fire, although they do not have regeneration +in deed, they do have it in desire. Otherwise neither would the +baptism of blood mean anything nor could there be a baptism of the +Spirit. Consequently, in order that man may enter the kingdom of +heaven, it is necessary that there be a baptism of water in deed, +as in the case of all baptized persons, or in desire, as in the +case of the martyrs and catechumens, who are prevented by death +from fulfilling their desire, or in symbol, as in the case of the +fathers of old.</p> +<p>446 It might be remarked that it was from this statement, +<span style="font-weight: bold">unless one is born again of water +and the Holy Spirit,</span> that the Pelagians derived their error +that children are baptized not in order to be cleansed from sin, +since they have none, but in order to be able to enter the kingdom +of God. But this is false, because as Augustine says in his book, +<i>The Baptism of Children,</i> it is not fitting for an image of +God, namely, man, to be excluded from the kingdom of God except for +some obstacle, which can be nothing but sin. Therefore, there must +be some sin, namely, original sin, in children who are excluded +from the kingdom.</p> +<p>447 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">What is +born of flesh is itself flesh,</span> he proves by reason that it +is necessary to be born of water and the Holy Spirit. And the +reasoning is this: No one can reach the kingdom unless he is made +spiritual; but no one is made spiritual except by the Holy Spirit; +therefore, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born +again of the Holy Spirit.</p> +<p>So he says, what is born of flesh (<i>ex carne</i>) is itself +flesh, i.e., birth according to the flesh makes one be born into +the life of the flesh: “The first man was from the earth, +earthly” (1 Cor 15:47); <span style="font-weight: bold">and +what is born of Spirit</span> (<i>ex Spiritu</i>) , i.e., from the +power of the Holy Spirit, <span style="font-weight: bold">is itself +spirit,</span> i.e., spiritual.</p> +<p>448 Note, however, that this preposition <i>ex</i> (from, of, +by) sometines designates a material cause, as when I say: “A +knife is made of (<i>ex</i>) iron”; sometimes it designates +an efficient cause, as when I say: “The house was built by +(<i>ex</i>) a carpenter.” Accordingly, the phrase, +<span style="font-weight: bold">what is born of</span> (<i>ex</i>) +flesh is itself flesh, can be understood according to either +efficient or material causality. As efficient cause, indeed, +because a power existing in flesh is productive of generation; and +as material cause, because some camal element in animals makes up +the animal generated. But nothing is said to be made out of spirit +(<i>ex spiritu</i>) in a material sense, since spirit is +unchangeable, whereas matter is the subject of change; but it is +said in the sense of efficient causality.</p> +<p>According to this, we can discern a threefold generation. One is +materially and effectively from (<i>ex</i>) the flesh, and is +common to all who exist according to the flesh. Another is +according to the Spirit effectively, and according to it we are +reborn as sons of God through the grace of the Holy Spirit, and are +made spiritual. The third is midway, that is, only materially from +the flesh but effectively from the Holy Spirit. And this is true in +the singular case of Christ: because he was born deriving his flesh +materially from the flesh of his mother, but effectively from the +Holy Spirit: “What she has conceived is of the Holy +Spirit” (Mt 1:20). Therefore, he was born holy: “The +Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will +overshadow you. And so the Holy One who will be born from you, will +be called the Son of God” (Lk 1:35).</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<center> +<p><b>LECTURE 2</b></p> +</center> +<blockquote> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">7 “Do not be surprised that I +said to you,<br /> +you must be born again.<br /> +8 The wind blows where it wills,<br /> +and you hear its sound, but you do not know<br /> +where it comes from or where it goes.<br /> +So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”</p> +<p>9 “How can all this happen?” asked Nicodemus. 10 +Jesus replied: “You are a teacher in Israel and you do not +know these things?</p> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">11 “Amen, amen I say to +you,<br /> +that we know of what we speak,<br /> +and we bear witness of what we see;<br /> +but you do not accept our testimony.<br /> +12 If I spoke of earthly things,<br /> +and you did not believe me,<br /> +how will you believe if I tell you of heavenly things?<br /> +13 No one has gone up to heaven<br /> +except the One who came down from heaven,<br /> +the Son of Man, who lives in heaven.<br /> +14 Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert,<br /> +so must the Son of Man be lifted up,<br /> +15 so that everyone who believes in him may not be lost,<br /> +but have eternal life.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>449 Above, in his instruction on spiritual generation, the Lord +presented a reason; here he gives an example. For we are led to see +that Nicodemus was troubled when he heard that <span style= +"font-weight: bold">what is born of Spirit is itself spirit.</span> +And so the Lord says to him, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not +be surprised that I said to you, you must be born again.</span></p> +<p>Here we should note that there are two kinds of surprise or +astonishment. One is the astonishment of devotion in the sense that +someone, considering the great things of God, sees that they are +incomprehensible to him; and so he is full of astonishment: +“The Lord on high is wonderful” (Ps 92:4), “Your +testimonies are wonderful” (Ps 118:129). Men are to be +encouraged, not discouraged, to this kind of astonishment The other +is the astonishment of disbelief, when someone does not believe +what is said. So Matthew (13:54) says: “They were +astonished,” and further on adds that “They did not +accept him.” It is from this kind of astonishment that the +Lord diverts Nicodeintis wheii he proposes an example and says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">The wind</span> (<i>spiritus</i>, +wind, spirit) <span style="font-weight: bold">blows where it +wills.</span> In the literal sense, the same words can he explained +in two ways.</p> +<p>450 In the first way, according to Chrysostom, spiritus is taken +for the wind, as in Psalm 148 (v 8): “The winds of the storm +that fulfill his word.” According to this interpretation, he +says four things about the wind. First, the power of the wind, when +he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the wind blows where it +wills.</span> And if you say that the wind has no will, one may +answer that “will” is taken for a natural appetite, +which is nothing more than a natural inclination, about which it is +said: “He created the weight of the wind” (Jb 28:25). +Secondly, he tells the evidence for the wind, when he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">and you hear its sound,</span> +where “sound” (<i>vox</i>, voice, sound) refers to the +sound the wind makes when it strikes a body. Of this we read: +“The sound (<i>vox</i>) of your thunder was in the +whirlwind” (Ps 76:19).</p> +<p>Thirdly, he mentions the origin of the wind, which is unknown; +so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but you do not know +where it comes from,</span> i.e., from where it starts: “He +brings forth the winds out of his storehouse” (Ps 134:7). +Fourthly, he mentions the wind’s destination, which is also +unknown; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">or where it +goes</span> you do not know, i.e., where it remains.</p> +<p>And he applies this similarity to the subject under discussion, +saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">So it is with everyone who +is born of the Spirit.</span> As if to say: If the wind, which is +corporeal, has an origin which is hidden and a course that is +unknown, why are you surprised if you cannot understand the course +of spiritual regeneration.</p> +<p>451 Augustine objects to this explanation and says that the Lord +was not speaking here about the wind, for we know where each of the +winds comes from and where it goes. For “Auster” comes +from the south and goes to the north; “Boreas” comes +from the north and goes to the south. Why, then, does the Lord say +of this wind, you do not know where it comes from or where it +goes?</p> +<p>One may answer that there are two ways in which the source of +the wind might be unknown. In one way, in general: and in this way +it is possible to know where it comes from, i.e., from which +direction of the world, for example, that Auster comes from the +south, and where it goes, that is, to the north. In another way, in +particular: and in this sense it is not known where the wind comes +from, i.e., at which precise place it originated, or where it goes, +i.e., exactly where it stops. And almost all the Greek doctors +agree with this exposition of Chrysostom.</p> +<p>452 In another way, <i>spiritus</i> is taken for the Holy +Spirit. And according to this, he mentions four things about the +Holy Spirit. First, his power, saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">The Spirit blows where it wills,</span> because +it is by the free use of his power that he breathes where he wills +and when he wills, by instructing hearts: “One and the same +Spirit does all these things, distributing to each as he +wills” (1 Cor 12:11). This refutes the error of Macedonius +who thought that the Holy Spirit was the minister of the Father and +the Son. But then he would not be breathing where he willed, but +where he was commanded.</p> +<p>453 Secondly, he mentions the evidence for the Holy Spirit, when +he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and you hear its +voice:</span> “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden +your hearts” (Ps 94:8).</p> +<p>Chrysostom objects to this and says that this cannot pertain to +the Holy Spirit. For the Lord was speaking to Nicodemus, who was +still an unbeliever, and thus not fit to hear the voice of the Holy +Spirit. We may answer to this, with Augustine, that there is a +twofold voice of the Holy Spirit. One is that by which he speaks +inwardly in man’s heart; and only believers and the saints +hear this voice, about which the Psalm (84:9) says: “I will +hear what the Lord God says within me.” The other voice is +that by which the Holy Spirit speaks in the Scriptures or through +those who preach, according to Matthew (10:20): “For it is +not you who speak, but the Holy Splirit who is speaking through +you.” And this voice is heard by unbelievers and sinners.</p> +<p>454 Thirdly, he refers to the origin of the Holy Spirit, which +is hidden; thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but you do +not know where it comes from,</span> although you may hear its +voice. And this is because the Holy Spirit comes from the Father +and the Son: “When the Paraclete comes, whom I will send you +from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the +Father” (below 15:26). But the Father and the Son +“dwell in inaccessible light, whom no man has seen or is able +to see” (1 Tim 6:16).</p> +<p>455 Fourthly, he gives the destination of the Holy Spirit, which +is also hidden; and so he says, you do not know where it goes, +because the Spirit leads one to a hidden end, that is, eternal +happiness. Thus it says in Ephesians (1:14) that the Holy Spirit is +“the pledge of our inheritance.” And again, “The +eye has not seen, nor has the ear heard, nor has the heart of man +conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 +Cor 2:9).</p> +<p>Or, <span style="font-weight: bold">you do not know where it +comes from,</span> i.e., how the Spirit enters into a person, +<span style="font-weight: bold">or where it goes,</span> i.e., to +what perfection he may lead him: “If he comes toward me, I +will not see him” (Jb 9:11).</p> +<p>456 <span style="font-weight: bold">So it is with everyone who +is born of the Spirit,</span> i.e., they are like the Holy Spirit. +And no wonder: for as he had said before, “What is born of +Spirit is itself spirit,” because the qualities of the Holy +Spirit are present in the spiritual man, just as the qualities of +fire are present in burning coal.</p> +<p>Therefore, the above four qualities of the Holy Spirit are found +in one who has been born of the Holy Spirit. First of all, he has +freedom: “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is +freedom” (2 Cor 3:17), for the Holy Spirit leads us to what +is right: “Your good Spirit will lead me to the right +path” (Ps 142:10); and he frees us from the slavery of sin +and of the law: “The law of the Spirit, of life in Christ, +has set me free” (Rom 8:2). Secondly, we get an indication of +him through the sound of his words; and when we hear them we know +his spirituality, for it is out of the abundance of the heart that +the mouth speaks.</p> +<p>Thirdly, he has an origin and an end that are hidden, because no +one can judge one who is spiritual: “The spiritual man judges +all things, and he himself is judged by no one” (1 Cor 2:15). +Or, we do not know where such a person comes from, i.e., the source +of his spiritual birth, which is baptismal grace; or where he goes, +i.e., of what he is made worthy, that is, of eternal life, which +remains concealed from us.</p> +<p>457 Then the cause and reason for spiritual regeneration are set +forth. First, a question is asked by Nicodemus; secondly, the +Lord’s answer is given (v 10).</p> +<p>458 It is apparent from the first that Nicodemus, as yet dull, +and remaining a Jew on the level of sense, was unable to understand +the mysteries of Christ in spite of the examples and explanations +that were given. And so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">How can all this happen?</span></p> +<p>There are two reasons why one may question about something. Some +question because of disbelief, as did Zechariah, saying: “How +will I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in +age” (Lk 1:18); “He confounds those who search into +mysteries” (Is 40:23). Others, on the other hand, question +because of a desire to know, as the Blessed Virgin did when she +said to the angel: “How shall this be, since I do not know +man?” (Lk 1:34). It is the latter who are instructed. And so, +because Nicodemus asked from a desire to learn, he deserved to be +instructed.</p> +<p>459 And this is what follows: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Jesus replied.</span> First the Lord chides him +for his slowness. Secondly, he answers his question (v 13).</p> +<p>460 He chides him for his slowness, basing himself on three +things. First, the condition of the person to whom he is speaking, +when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">You are a teacher in +Israel.</span> And here the Lord did not chide him to insult him. +Rather, because Nicodemus, presuming on his own knowledge, was +still relying on his status as a teacher, the Lord wished to make +him a temple of the Holy Spirit by humbling him: “For whom +will I have regard? For he who is humble and of contrite +spirit” (Is 66:2). And he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">You are a teacher,</span> because it is +tolerable if a simple person cannot grasp profound truths, but in a +teacher, it deserves rebuke. And so he says, You are a teacher, +i.e., of the letter that kills (2 Cor 3:6), <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and you do not know these things?</span> i.e., +spiritual things. “For although you ought to be teachers by +now, you yourselves need to be taught again” (Heb 5:12).</p> +<p>461 You might say that the Lord would have rebuked Nicodemus +justly if he had spoken to him about matters of the Old Law and he +did not understand them; but he spoke to him about the New Law. I +answer that the things which the Lord says of spiritual generation +are contained in the Old Law, although under a figure, as is said +in 1 Corinthians (10:2): “All were baptized into Moses, in +the cloud and in the sea.” And the prophets also said this: +“I will pour clean water upon you, and you will be cleansed +from all your uncleanness” (Ez 36:25).</p> +<p>462 Secondly, he rebukes him for his slowness on account of the +character of the person who is speaking. For it is tolerable if one +does not acquiesce to the statements of an ignorant person; but it +is reprehensible to reject the statements of a man who is wise and +who possesses great authority. And so he says, Amen, amen I say to +you, that we <span style="font-weight: bold">know of what we speak, +and we bear witness of what we see.</span> For a qualified witness +must base his testimony on hearing or sight: “What we have +seen and heard” (1 Jn 1:3). And so the Lord mentions both: +<span style="font-weight: bold">we know of what we speak, and we +bear witness of what</span> we see. Indeed, the Lord as man knows +all things: “Lord, you know all things” (below 21:17); +“The Lord, whose knowledge is holy, knows clearly” (2 +Mc 6:30). Further, he sees all things by his divine knowledge: +“I speak of what I have seen with my Father,” as we +read below (8:38).</p> +<p>He speaks in the plural, we know, we see, in order to suggest +the mystery of the Trinity: “The Father, who dwells in me, he +does the works” (below 14:10). Or, we know, i.e., I, and +others who have been made spiritual, because “No one knows +the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son wishes to reveal +him” (Mt 11:27).</p> +<p><span style="font-weight: bold">But you do not accept our +testimony,</span> so approved, so solid. “And his testimony +no one accepts (below 3:32).</p> +<p>463 Thirdly, he rebukes him for his slowness because of the +quality of the things under discussion. For it is not unusual when +someone does not grasp difficult matters, but it is inexcusable not +to grasp easy things. So he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">If I spoke of earthly things, and you did not +believe, how will you believe if I tell you of heavenly +things?</span> As if to say: If you do not grasp these easy things, +how will you be able to understand the progress of the Holy Spirit? +“What is on earth we find difficult, and who will search Out +the things in heaven,” as is said in Wisdom (9:10).</p> +<p>464 But one might object that the above does not show that the +Lord spoke of earthly things to Nicodemus. I answer, according to +Chrysostom, that the Lord’s statement, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">If I spoke of earthly things,</span> refers to +the example of the wind. For the wind, being something which is +generable and corruptible, is regarded as an earthly thing. Or one +might say, again according to Chrysostom, that the spiritual +generation which is given in baptism is heavenly as to its source, +which sanctifies and regenerates; but it is earthly as to its +subject, for the one regenerated, man, is of the earth.</p> +<p>Or one might answer, according to Augustine, that we must +understand this in reference to what Christ said earlier: +“Destroy this temple,” which is earthly, because he +said this about the temple of his body, which he had taken from the +earth.</p> +<p><span style="font-weight: bold">If I spoke of earthly things, +and you did not believe, how will you believe if I tell you of +heavenly things?</span> As if to say: If you do not believe in a +spiritual generation occurring in time, how will you believe in the +eternal generation of the Son? Or, if you do not believe what I +tell you about the power of my body, how will you believe what I +tell you about the power of my divinity and about the power of the +Holy Spirit?</p> +<p>465 <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus replied.</span> Here +he answers the question. First, he lays down the causes of +spiritual regeneration. Secondly, he explains what he says (3:16). +Now there are two causes of spiritual regeneration, namely, the +mystery of the incarnation of Christ, and his passion. So first, he treats of the incarnation; secondly, of the passion (3:14).</p> -<p>466 Here we should consider, first of all, how this answer of Christ is an adequa~,e reply to -the question of Nicodemus. For above, when the Lord was speaking of the Spirit, he said: <span style="font-weight: bold">you -do not know where it comes from or where it </span>goes. We understand by this that spiritual -regeneration has a hidden source and a hidden end. Now the things in heaven are hidden from -us: “Who will search out the things in heaven?” (Wis 9:16). Therefore, the sense of -Nicodemus’ question, <span style="font-weight: bold">How can all this happen? </span>is this: How can something come from the -secret things of heaven or go to the secret things of heaven? So before answering, the Lord -expressed this interpretation of the question, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">how will you believe if I tell you of -heavenly things?</span></p> -<p>And immediately he begins to show whose prerogative it is to ascend into heaven, namely, -anyone who came down from heaven, according to the statement of Ephesians (4:10): “He -who descended is he who ascended.” This is verified even in natural things, namely, that each -body tends to a place according to its origin or nature. And so in this way it can come about -that someone, through the Spirit, may go to a place which carnal persons do not know, i.e., by -ascending into heaven, if this is done through the power of one who descended from heaven: -because he descended in order that, in ascending, he might open a way for us: “He ascends, -opening the way before them” (Mi 2:13).</p> -<p>467 Some have fallen into error because of his saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">the One who came down from -heaven, the Son of Man. </span>For since Son of Man designates human nature, which is composed -of soul and body, then because he says that the Son descended from heaven, Valentinus -wanted to maintain that he even took his body from heaven and thus passed through the -Virgin without receiving anything from her, as water passes through a pipe; so that his body -was neither of an earthly substance nor taken from the Virgin. But this is contrary to the -statement of the Apostle, writing to the Romans (1:3): “who was made from the seed of -David according to the flesh.”</p> -<p>On the other hand, Origen said that he descended from heaven as to his soul, which, he says, -had been created along with the angels from the very beginning, and that later this soul -descended from heaven and took flesh from the Virgin. But this also conflicts with the -Catholic faith, which teaches that souls do not exist before their bodies.</p> -<p>468 Therefore, we should not understand that the Son of Man descended from heaven -according to his human nature, but only according to his divine nature. For since in Christ -there is one <i>suppositum</i>, or hypostasis, or person of the two natures, the divine and human -natures, then no matter from which of these two natures this <i>suppositum</i> is named, divine and -human things can be attributed to him. For we can say that the Son of Man created the stars -and that the Son of God was crucified. But the Son of God was crucified, not according to his -divine nature, but according to his human nature; and the Son of Man created the stars -according to his divine nature. And so in things that are said of Christ, the distinction is not to -be taken with respect to that about which they are said, because divine and human things are -said of God and man indifferently; but a distinction must be made with respect to that -according to which they are said, because divine things are said of Christ according to his -divine nature, but human things according to his human nature. Thus, to descend from heaven -is said of the Son of Man, not according to his human nature, but according to his divine -nature, according to which it was appropriate to him to have been from heaven before the -incarnation, as is said, “Heaven belongs to the Lord” (Ps 113:16).</p> -<p>469 he is said to have come down, but not by local motion, becatise then he Would not have -remained in heaven; for nothing which moves locally remains in the place from which it -comes down. And so to exclude local motion, he adds, <span style="font-weight: bold">who lives in heaven. </span>As if to say: He -descended from heaven in such a way as yet to be in heaven. For he came down from heaven -without ceasing to be above, yet assuming a nature which is from below. And because he is -not enclosed or held fast by his body which exists on earth, he was, according to his divinity, -in heaven and everywhere. And therefore to indicate that he is said to have come down in this -way, because he assumed a [human] nature, he said, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son of Man </span>came down, i.e., insofar -as he became Son of Man.</p> -<p>470 Or it can be said, as Hilary does, that he came down from heaven as to his body: not that -the material of Christ’s body came down from heaven, but that the power which formed it -was from heaven.</p> -<p>471 But why does he say, <span style="font-weight: bold">No one has gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who lives -in heaven? </span>For have not Paul and Peter and the other saints gone up, according to 2 -Corinthians (5:1): “We have a house in the heavens.” I answer that no one goes up into -heaven except Christ and his members, i.e., those believers who are just. Accordingly, the -Son of God came down from heaven in order that, by making us his members, he might -prepare us to ascend into heaven: now, indeed, in hope, but later in reality. “He has raised us -up, and has given us a place in heaven in Christ Jesus” (Eph 2:6).</p> -<p>472 Here he mentions the mystery of the passion, in virtue of which baptism has its efficacy: -“We who have been baptized into Christ Jesus, have been baptized into his death” (Rom 6:3). -And with regard to this he does three things. First, he gives a symbol for the passion. -Secondly, the manner of the passion. Thirdly, the fruit of the passion.</p> -<p>473 He takes the symbol from the old law, in order to adapt to the understanding of -Nicodemus; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert. </span>This refers to -Numbers (21:5) when the Lord, faced with the Jewish people saying, “We are sick of this -useless food,” sent serpents to punish them; and when the people came to Moses and he -interceded with the Lord, the Lord commanded that for a remedy they make a serpent of -bronze; and this was to serve both as a remedy against those serpents and as a symbol of the -Lord’s passion. Hence it says that this bronze serpent was lifted up as a sign (Nm 21:9).</p> -<p>Now it is characteristic of serpents that they are poisonous, but not so the serpent of bronze, -although it was a symbol of a poisonous serpent. So, too, Christ did not have sin, which is -also a poison: “Sin, when it is fully developed, brings forth death” (Jas 1:15); but he had the -likeness of sin: “God sent his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom 8:3). And thus -Christ had the effect of the serpent against the insurgence of inflamed concupiscences.</p> -<p>474 He shows the manner of the passion when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">so must the Son of Man be lifted -up: </span>and this refers to the lifting up of the cross. So below (12:34) when it says, “The Son of -Man must be lifted up,” it also has, “He said this to indicate the manner of his death.”</p> -<p>He willed to die lifted up, first of all, to cleanse the heavens: for since he had cleansed the -things on earth by the sanctity of his life, the things of the air were left to be cleansed by his -death: “through him he should reconcile all things to himself, whether on earth or in the -heavens, making peace through his blood” (Col 1:20). Secondly, to triumph over the demons -who prepare for war in the air: “the prince of the power of the air” (Eph 2:2). Thirdly, he -wished to die lifted up to draw our hearts to himself: “I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will -draw all to myself” (below 12:32). And fourthly, because in the death of the cross he was -lifted up in the sense that there he triumphed over his enemies; so it is not called a death, but -a lifting up: “He will drink from the stream on the way, therefore he will lift up his head” (Ps -109:7). Fifthly, he willed to die lifted up because the cross was the reason for his being lifted -up, i.e., exalted: “He became obedient to the Father even to death, the death of the cross; on -account of which God has exalted him” (Phil 2:8).</p> -<p>475 Now the fruit of Christ’s passion is eternal life; hence he says, so <span style="font-weight: bold">that everyone who -believes in him, </span>performing good works, <span style="font-weight: bold">may not be lost, but have eternal life. </span>And this -fruit corresponds to the fruit of the symbolic serpent. For whoever looked upon the serpent of -bronze was freed from poison and his life was preserved. But he who looks upon the lifted up -Son of Man, and believes in the crucified Christ, he is freed from poison and sin: “Whoever -believes in me will never die” (below 11:26), and is preserved for eternal life. “These things -are written that you may believe ... and that believing you may have life in his name” (below -20:3 1).</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 3</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p style="margin-left: 0.5in">16 “For God so loved the world -<BR>that he gave his Only Begotten Son, -<BR>so that whoever believes in him should not perish, -<BR>but have eternal life. -<BR>17 God did not send his Son into the world -<br>to judge the world, -<br>but that the world might he saved through him. -<br>18 Whoever believes in him is not judged; -<br>but whoever does not believe is already judged, -<br>since he does not believe in the name of the -<br>Only Begotten Son of God. -<br>19 The judgment of condemnation is this: -<br>the light came into the world, -<br>and men loved darkness more than the light, -<br>because their deeds were evil. -<br>20 Everyone who practices evil hates the light, -<br>and does not approach the light -<br>for fear that his deeds might be exposed. -<br>21 But everyone who practices the truth -<br>comes to the light, -<BR>to make clear that his deeds are done in God.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>476 Above, the Lord assigned as the cause of spiritual regeneration the coming down of the -Son and the lifting up of the Son of Man; and he set forth its fruit, which is eternal life. But -this fruit seemed unbelievable to men laboring under the necessity of dying. And so now the -Lord explains this. First, he proves the greatness of the fruit from the greatness of God’s love. +<p>466 Here we should consider, first of all, how this answer of +Christ is an adequa~,e reply to the question of Nicodemus. For +above, when the Lord was speaking of the Spirit, he said: +<span style="font-weight: bold">you do not know where it comes from +or where it</span> goes. We understand by this that spiritual +regeneration has a hidden source and a hidden end. Now the things +in heaven are hidden from us: “Who will search out the things +in heaven?” (Wis 9:16). Therefore, the sense of +Nicodemus’ question, <span style="font-weight: bold">How can +all this happen?</span> is this: How can something come from the +secret things of heaven or go to the secret things of heaven? So +before answering, the Lord expressed this interpretation of the +question, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">how will you +believe if I tell you of heavenly things?</span></p> +<p>And immediately he begins to show whose prerogative it is to +ascend into heaven, namely, anyone who came down from heaven, +according to the statement of Ephesians (4:10): “He who +descended is he who ascended.” This is verified even in +natural things, namely, that each body tends to a place according +to its origin or nature. And so in this way it can come about that +someone, through the Spirit, may go to a place which carnal persons +do not know, i.e., by ascending into heaven, if this is done +through the power of one who descended from heaven: because he +descended in order that, in ascending, he might open a way for us: +“He ascends, opening the way before them” (Mi +2:13).</p> +<p>467 Some have fallen into error because of his saying, +<span style="font-weight: bold">the One who came down from heaven, +the Son of Man.</span> For since Son of Man designates human +nature, which is composed of soul and body, then because he says +that the Son descended from heaven, Valentinus wanted to maintain +that he even took his body from heaven and thus passed through the +Virgin without receiving anything from her, as water passes through +a pipe; so that his body was neither of an earthly substance nor +taken from the Virgin. But this is contrary to the statement of the +Apostle, writing to the Romans (1:3): “who was made from the +seed of David according to the flesh.”</p> +<p>On the other hand, Origen said that he descended from heaven as +to his soul, which, he says, had been created along with the angels +from the very beginning, and that later this soul descended from +heaven and took flesh from the Virgin. But this also conflicts with +the Catholic faith, which teaches that souls do not exist before +their bodies.</p> +<p>468 Therefore, we should not understand that the Son of Man +descended from heaven according to his human nature, but only +according to his divine nature. For since in Christ there is one +<i>suppositum</i>, or hypostasis, or person of the two natures, the +divine and human natures, then no matter from which of these two +natures this <i>suppositum</i> is named, divine and human things +can be attributed to him. For we can say that the Son of Man +created the stars and that the Son of God was crucified. But the +Son of God was crucified, not according to his divine nature, but +according to his human nature; and the Son of Man created the stars +according to his divine nature. And so in things that are said of +Christ, the distinction is not to be taken with respect to that +about which they are said, because divine and human things are said +of God and man indifferently; but a distinction must be made with +respect to that according to which they are said, because divine +things are said of Christ according to his divine nature, but human +things according to his human nature. Thus, to descend from heaven +is said of the Son of Man, not according to his human nature, but +according to his divine nature, according to which it was +appropriate to him to have been from heaven before the incarnation, +as is said, “Heaven belongs to the Lord” (Ps +113:16).</p> +<p>469 he is said to have come down, but not by local motion, +becatise then he Would not have remained in heaven; for nothing +which moves locally remains in the place from which it comes down. +And so to exclude local motion, he adds, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">who lives in heaven.</span> As if to say: He +descended from heaven in such a way as yet to be in heaven. For he +came down from heaven without ceasing to be above, yet assuming a +nature which is from below. And because he is not enclosed or held +fast by his body which exists on earth, he was, according to his +divinity, in heaven and everywhere. And therefore to indicate that +he is said to have come down in this way, because he assumed a +[human] nature, he said, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son of +Man</span> came down, i.e., insofar as he became Son of Man.</p> +<p>470 Or it can be said, as Hilary does, that he came down from +heaven as to his body: not that the material of Christ’s body +came down from heaven, but that the power which formed it was from +heaven.</p> +<p>471 But why does he say, <span style="font-weight: bold">No one +has gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who lives in +heaven?</span> For have not Paul and Peter and the other saints +gone up, according to 2 Corinthians (5:1): “We have a house +in the heavens.” I answer that no one goes up into heaven +except Christ and his members, i.e., those believers who are just. +Accordingly, the Son of God came down from heaven in order that, by +making us his members, he might prepare us to ascend into heaven: +now, indeed, in hope, but later in reality. “He has raised us +up, and has given us a place in heaven in Christ Jesus” (Eph +2:6).</p> +<p>472 Here he mentions the mystery of the passion, in virtue of +which baptism has its efficacy: “We who have been baptized +into Christ Jesus, have been baptized into his death” (Rom +6:3). And with regard to this he does three things. First, he gives +a symbol for the passion. Secondly, the manner of the passion. +Thirdly, the fruit of the passion.</p> +<p>473 He takes the symbol from the old law, in order to adapt to +the understanding of Nicodemus; so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the +desert.</span> This refers to Numbers (21:5) when the Lord, faced +with the Jewish people saying, “We are sick of this useless +food,” sent serpents to punish them; and when the people came +to Moses and he interceded with the Lord, the Lord commanded that +for a remedy they make a serpent of bronze; and this was to serve +both as a remedy against those serpents and as a symbol of the +Lord’s passion. Hence it says that this bronze serpent was +lifted up as a sign (Nm 21:9).</p> +<p>Now it is characteristic of serpents that they are poisonous, +but not so the serpent of bronze, although it was a symbol of a +poisonous serpent. So, too, Christ did not have sin, which is also +a poison: “Sin, when it is fully developed, brings forth +death” (Jas 1:15); but he had the likeness of sin: “God +sent his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom 8:3). +And thus Christ had the effect of the serpent against the +insurgence of inflamed concupiscences.</p> +<p>474 He shows the manner of the passion when he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">so must the Son of Man be lifted +up:</span> and this refers to the lifting up of the cross. So below +(12:34) when it says, “The Son of Man must be lifted +up,” it also has, “He said this to indicate the manner +of his death.”</p> +<p>He willed to die lifted up, first of all, to cleanse the +heavens: for since he had cleansed the things on earth by the +sanctity of his life, the things of the air were left to be +cleansed by his death: “through him he should reconcile all +things to himself, whether on earth or in the heavens, making peace +through his blood” (Col 1:20). Secondly, to triumph over the +demons who prepare for war in the air: “the prince of the +power of the air” (Eph 2:2). Thirdly, he wished to die lifted +up to draw our hearts to himself: “I, if I am lifted up from +the earth, will draw all to myself” (below 12:32). And +fourthly, because in the death of the cross he was lifted up in the +sense that there he triumphed over his enemies; so it is not called +a death, but a lifting up: “He will drink from the stream on +the way, therefore he will lift up his head” (Ps 109:7). +Fifthly, he willed to die lifted up because the cross was the +reason for his being lifted up, i.e., exalted: “He became +obedient to the Father even to death, the death of the cross; on +account of which God has exalted him” (Phil 2:8).</p> +<p>475 Now the fruit of Christ’s passion is eternal life; +hence he says, so <span style="font-weight: bold">that everyone who +believes in him,</span> performing good works, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">may not be lost, but have eternal life.</span> +And this fruit corresponds to the fruit of the symbolic serpent. +For whoever looked upon the serpent of bronze was freed from poison +and his life was preserved. But he who looks upon the lifted up Son +of Man, and believes in the crucified Christ, he is freed from +poison and sin: “Whoever believes in me will never die” +(below 11:26), and is preserved for eternal life. “These +things are written that you may believe ... and that believing you +may have life in his name” (below 20:3 1).</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 3</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">16 “For God so loved the +world<br /> +that he gave his Only Begotten Son,<br /> +so that whoever believes in him should not perish,<br /> +but have eternal life.<br /> +17 God did not send his Son into the world<br /> +to judge the world,<br /> +but that the world might he saved through him.<br /> +18 Whoever believes in him is not judged;<br /> +but whoever does not believe is already judged,<br /> +since he does not believe in the name of the<br /> +Only Begotten Son of God.<br /> +19 The judgment of condemnation is this:<br /> +the light came into the world,<br /> +and men loved darkness more than the light,<br /> +because their deeds were evil.<br /> +20 Everyone who practices evil hates the light,<br /> +and does not approach the light<br /> +for fear that his deeds might be exposed.<br /> +21 But everyone who practices the truth<br /> +comes to the light,<br /> +to make clear that his deeds are done in God.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>476 Above, the Lord assigned as the cause of spiritual +regeneration the coming down of the Son and the lifting up of the +Son of Man; and he set forth its fruit, which is eternal life. But +this fruit seemed unbelievable to men laboring under the necessity +of dying. And so now the Lord explains this. First, he proves the +greatness of the fruit from the greatness of God’s love. Secondly, he rejects a certain reply (v 17).</p> -<p>477 Here we should note that the cause of all our good is the Lord and divine love. For to -love is, properly speaking, to will good to someone. Therefore, since the will of God is the -cause of things, good comes to us because God loves us. And God’s love is the cause of the -good of nature: “You love everything which exists” (Wis 11:2 5). It is also the cause of the -good which is grace: “I have loved you with an. everlasting love, and so I have drawn you” -i.e., through grace (Jer 3 1:3). But it is because of his great love that he gives us the good of -glory. So he shows us here, from four standpoints, that this love of God is the greatest.</p> -<p>First, from the person of the one loving, because it is God who loves, and immeasurably. So -he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For God so loved: </span>“He has loved the people; all the holy ones are in his hand” (Dt -33:3). Secondly, from the condition of the one who is loved, because it is man, a bodily -creature of the world, i.e., existing in sin: “God shows his love for us, because while we were -still his enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son” (Rom 5:8). Thus he -says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the world. </span>Thirdly, from the greatness of his gifts, for love is shown by a gift; as -Gregory says: “The proof of love is given by action.” But God has given us the greatest of -gifts, his Only Begotten Son, and so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">that he gave his Only Begotten Son. </span>“God did -not spare his own Soil, but delivered him up for all of us” (Rom 8:32).</p> -<p>He says his Son, i.e., his natural Son, consubstantial, not an adopted son, i.e., not those sons -of which the Psalmist says: “I said: You are gods” (Ps 81:6). This shows that the opinion of -Arius is false: for if the Son of God were a creature, as he said, the immensity of God’s love -through the taking on of infinite goodness, which no creature can receive, could not have -been revealed in him. He further says <span style="font-weight: bold">Only Begotten, </span>to show that God does not have a love -divided among many sons, but all of it is for that Son whom he gave to prove the immensity -of his love: “For the Father loves the Son, and shows him everything that he does” (below -5:20).</p> -<p>Fourthly, from the greatness of its fruit, because through him we have eternal life. Hence he -says, <span style="font-weight: bold">so that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life, </span>which he -obtained for us through the death of the cross.</p> -<p>478 But did God give his Son with the intention that he should die on the cross? He did -indeed give him for the death of the cross inasmuch as he gave him the will to suffer on it. -And he did this in two ways. First, because as the Son of God he willed from eternity to -assume flesh and to suffer for us; and this will he had from the Father. Secondly, because the -will to suffer was infused into the soul of Christ by God.</p> -<p>479 Note that above, when the Lord was speaking about the coming down which belongs to -Christ according to his divinity, he called him the Son of God; and this because of the one -<i>suppositum</i> of the two natures, as was explained above. And so divine things can be said -about the <i>suppositum</i> of the human nature, and human things can be said about the -<i>suppositum</i> of the divine nature, but not with reference to the same nature. Rather, divine -things are said with reference to the divine nature, and human things with reference to the -human nature. Now the specific reason why he here calls him the Son of God is that he set -forth that gift as a sign of the divine love, through which the fruit of eternal life comes to us. -And so, he should have been called by that name which indicates the power that produces -eternal life; and this power is not in Christ as Son of Man but as Son of God: “This is the true -God and eternal life,” as we read in 1 John (5:20); “In him was life” (above 1:4).</p> -<p>480 Note also that he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">should not perish. </span>Someone is said to be perishing when he is -hindered from arriving at the end to which he is ordained. But the end to which man is -ordained is eternal life, and as long as he sins, he turns himself from that end. And although -while he is living he cannot entirely perish in the sense that he cannot be restored, yet when -he dies in sin, then he entirely perishes: “The way of the wicked will perish” (Ps 1:7).</p> -<p>He indicates the immensity of God’s love in saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">have eternal life: </span>for by giving eternal -life, he gives himself. For eternal life is nothing else than enjoying God. But to give oneself is -a sign of great love: “But God, who is rich in mercy, has brought us to life in Christ” (Eph -2:5), i.e., he gave us eternal life.</p> -<p>481 Here the Lord excludes an objection that might be made. For in the old law it was -promised that the Lord would come to judge: “The Lord will come to judge” (Is 3:14). So -someone might say that the Son of God had not come to give eternal life but in order to judge -the world. The Lord rejects this. First, he shows that he has not come to judge. Secondly, he -proves it (v 18).</p> -<p>482 So he says: The Son of God has not come to judge, because <span style="font-weight: bold">God did not send his Son, -</span>referring to his first coming, <span style="font-weight: bold">into the world to judge the world, but that the world might -be saved through him. </span>The same thing is found below (12:47): “I did not come to judge the -world, but to save the world.”</p> -<p>Now man’s salvation is to attain to God: “My salvation is in God” (Ps 61:8). And to attain to -God is to obtain eternal life; hence to be saved is the same as to have eternal life. However, -because the Lord says, “I did not come to judge the world,” men should not be lazy or abuse -God’s mercy, or give themselves over to sin: because although in his first coming he did not -come to judge but to forgive, yet in his second coming, as Chrysostom says, he will come to -judge but not to forgive. “At the appointed time I will judge with rigor” (Ps 74:3).</p> -<p>483 However, this seems to conflict with what is said below (9:39): “1 came into this world -to judge.” I answer that there are two kinds of judgment. One is the judgment of distinction, -and the Son has come for this in his first coming; because with his coming men are -distinguished, some by blindness and some by the light of grace. The other is the judgment of +<p>477 Here we should note that the cause of all our good is the +Lord and divine love. For to love is, properly speaking, to will +good to someone. Therefore, since the will of God is the cause of +things, good comes to us because God loves us. And God’s love +is the cause of the good of nature: “You love everything +which exists” (Wis 11:2 5). It is also the cause of the good +which is grace: “I have loved you with an. everlasting love, +and so I have drawn you” i.e., through grace (Jer 3 1:3). But +it is because of his great love that he gives us the good of glory. +So he shows us here, from four standpoints, that this love of God +is the greatest.</p> +<p>First, from the person of the one loving, because it is God who +loves, and immeasurably. So he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">For God so loved:</span> “He has loved +the people; all the holy ones are in his hand” (Dt 33:3). +Secondly, from the condition of the one who is loved, because it is +man, a bodily creature of the world, i.e., existing in sin: +“God shows his love for us, because while we were still his +enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son” +(Rom 5:8). Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the +world.</span> Thirdly, from the greatness of his gifts, for love is +shown by a gift; as Gregory says: “The proof of love is given +by action.” But God has given us the greatest of gifts, his +Only Begotten Son, and so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">that he gave his Only Begotten Son.</span> +“God did not spare his own Soil, but delivered him up for all +of us” (Rom 8:32).</p> +<p>He says his Son, i.e., his natural Son, consubstantial, not an +adopted son, i.e., not those sons of which the Psalmist says: +“I said: You are gods” (Ps 81:6). This shows that the +opinion of Arius is false: for if the Son of God were a creature, +as he said, the immensity of God’s love through the taking on +of infinite goodness, which no creature can receive, could not have +been revealed in him. He further says <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Only Begotten,</span> to show that God does not +have a love divided among many sons, but all of it is for that Son +whom he gave to prove the immensity of his love: “For the +Father loves the Son, and shows him everything that he does” +(below 5:20).</p> +<p>Fourthly, from the greatness of its fruit, because through him +we have eternal life. Hence he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">so that whoever believes in him should not +perish, but have eternal life,</span> which he obtained for us +through the death of the cross.</p> +<p>478 But did God give his Son with the intention that he should +die on the cross? He did indeed give him for the death of the cross +inasmuch as he gave him the will to suffer on it. And he did this +in two ways. First, because as the Son of God he willed from +eternity to assume flesh and to suffer for us; and this will he had +from the Father. Secondly, because the will to suffer was infused +into the soul of Christ by God.</p> +<p>479 Note that above, when the Lord was speaking about the coming +down which belongs to Christ according to his divinity, he called +him the Son of God; and this because of the one <i>suppositum</i> +of the two natures, as was explained above. And so divine things +can be said about the <i>suppositum</i> of the human nature, and +human things can be said about the <i>suppositum</i> of the divine +nature, but not with reference to the same nature. Rather, divine +things are said with reference to the divine nature, and human +things with reference to the human nature. Now the specific reason +why he here calls him the Son of God is that he set forth that gift +as a sign of the divine love, through which the fruit of eternal +life comes to us. And so, he should have been called by that name +which indicates the power that produces eternal life; and this +power is not in Christ as Son of Man but as Son of God: “This +is the true God and eternal life,” as we read in 1 John +(5:20); “In him was life” (above 1:4).</p> +<p>480 Note also that he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">should not perish.</span> Someone is said to be +perishing when he is hindered from arriving at the end to which he +is ordained. But the end to which man is ordained is eternal life, +and as long as he sins, he turns himself from that end. And +although while he is living he cannot entirely perish in the sense +that he cannot be restored, yet when he dies in sin, then he +entirely perishes: “The way of the wicked will perish” +(Ps 1:7).</p> +<p>He indicates the immensity of God’s love in saying, +<span style="font-weight: bold">have eternal life:</span> for by +giving eternal life, he gives himself. For eternal life is nothing +else than enjoying God. But to give oneself is a sign of great +love: “But God, who is rich in mercy, has brought us to life +in Christ” (Eph 2:5), i.e., he gave us eternal life.</p> +<p>481 Here the Lord excludes an objection that might be made. For +in the old law it was promised that the Lord would come to judge: +“The Lord will come to judge” (Is 3:14). So someone +might say that the Son of God had not come to give eternal life but +in order to judge the world. The Lord rejects this. First, he shows +that he has not come to judge. Secondly, he proves it (v 18).</p> +<p>482 So he says: The Son of God has not come to judge, because +<span style="font-weight: bold">God did not send his Son,</span> +referring to his first coming, <span style="font-weight: bold">into +the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved +through him.</span> The same thing is found below (12:47): “I +did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.”</p> +<p>Now man’s salvation is to attain to God: “My +salvation is in God” (Ps 61:8). And to attain to God is to +obtain eternal life; hence to be saved is the same as to have +eternal life. However, because the Lord says, “I did not come +to judge the world,” men should not be lazy or abuse +God’s mercy, or give themselves over to sin: because although +in his first coming he did not come to judge but to forgive, yet in +his second coming, as Chrysostom says, he will come to judge but +not to forgive. “At the appointed time I will judge with +rigor” (Ps 74:3).</p> +<p>483 However, this seems to conflict with what is said below +(9:39): “1 came into this world to judge.” I answer +that there are two kinds of judgment. One is the judgment of +distinction, and the Son has come for this in his first coming; +because with his coming men are distinguished, some by blindness +and some by the light of grace. The other is the judgment of condemnation; and he did not come for this as such.</p> -<p>484 Now he proves what he had said, as though by a process of elimination, in the following -way: Whoever will be judged will be either a believer or an unbeliever. But I have not come -to judge unbelievers, because they are already judged. Therefore, from the outset, God did not -send his Son to judge the world. So first he shows that believers are not judged. Secondly, -that unbelievers are notjudged (v 18).</p> -<p>485 He says therefore: I have not come to judge the world: because he did not come to judge -believers, for <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in him is not judged, </span>with the judgment of condemnation, -with which no one who believes in him with faith informed by love is judged: “Whoever -believes ... will not encounter judgment, but will pass from death to life” (below 5:24). But he -is judged with the judgment of reward and approval, of which the Apostle says: “It is the Lord -who judges me” (1 Cor 4:4).</p> -<p>486 But will there be many believing sinners who will not be damned? I reply that some -heretics [e.g., Origen] have said that no believer, however great a sinner he may be, will be -damned, but he will be saved by reason of his foundation of salvation, namely, his faith, -although he may suffer some [temporary] punishment. They take as the basis of their error the -statement of the Apostle: “No one can lay a foundation other that the one that has been laid, -that is, Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 3:11); and further on: “If a man’s building burns ... he himself -will be saved as one fleeing through fire” (3:15).</p> -<p>But this view is clearly contrary to what the Apostle says in Galatians (5:1): “It is obvious -what proceeds from the flesh: lewd conduct, impurity, licentiousness ... Those who do such -things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” Therefore we must say that the foundation of -salvation is not faith without charity (unformed faith), but faith informed by charity. -Significantly therefore the Lord did not say, “whoever believes him,” but <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever believes -in him, </span>that is, whoever by believing tends toward him through love <span style="font-weight: bold">is not judged, </span>because -he does not sin mortally, thereby removing the foundation.</p> -<p>Or one could say, following Chrysostom, that everyone who acts sinfully is not a believer: -“They profess to know God, but they deny him by their actions” (Ti 1:16); but only one who -acts worthily: “Show me your faith by your works” (Jas 2:18). It is only such a one who is not -judged and not condemned for unbelief.</p> -<p>487 Here [the Lord] shows that unbelievers are not judged. First he makes the statement; -secondly, he explains it (v 19).</p> -<p>488 Concerning the first we should note, according to Augustine, that Christ does not say, -“whoever does not believe is judged,” but rather <span style="font-weight: bold">is not judged. </span>This can be explained in three -ways. For, according to Augustine, whoever does not believe is not judged, because he is -already judged, not in fact, but in God’s foreknowledge, that is, it is already known to God -that he will be condemned: “The Lord knows who are his” (2 Tim 2:19). In another way: -according to Chrysostom, <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever does not believe is already judged, </span>that is, the very fact -that he does not believe is for him a condemnation: for not to believe is not to adhere to the -light—which is to live in darkness, and this is a momentous condemnation: “All were bound -with one chain of darkness” (Wis 17:17). “What kind ofjoy can I have, I who sit in darkness -and do not see the light of heaven?” (Tb 5:12). In a third way: also according to Chrysostom, -<span style="font-weight: bold">whoever does not believe is not judged, </span>that is, being already condemned, he displays the -obvious reason for his condemnation. This is like saying that a person who is proven guilty of -death is already dead, even before the sentence of death has been passed on him, because he -is as good as dead.</p> -<p>Hence Gregory says that in passing judgments there is a twofold order. Some will be -sentenced by a trial; such are the ones who have something not deserving of condemnation, -namely, the good of faith, that is, sinners who believe. But unbelievers, Whose reason for -condemnation is manifest, are sentenced without trial; and of these it is said, <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever does -not believe is already judged. </span>“In judgment the wicked will not stand” (Ps 1:6), that is, stand -in trial.</p> -<p>489 It should be noted that to be judged is the same as to be condemned; and to be -condemned is to be shut out from salvation, to which only one road leads, that is, the name of -the Son of God: “There is no other name under heaven given to men, by which we are saved” -(Acts 4:12); “O’God, save me by your name” (Ps 53:3). Therefore, those who do not believe -in the Son of God are cut off from salvation, and the cause of their damnation is evident.</p> -<p>490 Here the Lord explains his statement that unbelievers have an evident cause for their -condemnation. First, he sets forth the sign which shows this. Secondly, the fittingness of this -sign (v 20).</p> -<p>491 In the sign he sets forth he does three things. First, he mentions the gift of God. Secondly, -the perversity of mind in unbelievers. Thirdly, the cause of this perversity.</p> -<p>So he says: It is abundantly clear that <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever does not believe is already judged, </span>because -<span style="font-weight: bold">the light came into the world. </span>For men were in the darkness of ignorance, and God -destroyed this darkness by sending a light into the world so that men might know the truth: “I -am the light of the world. He who follows me does not walk in darkness, but will have the -light of life” (below 8:12); “To enlighten those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of -death” (Lk 1:78). Now the light came into the world because men could not come to it: for -“He dwells in inaccessible light, whom no man has seen or is able to see” (1 Tim 6:16).</p> -<p>It is also clear from the perversity of mind in unbelievers who <span style="font-weight: bold">loved darkness more than the -light, </span>i.e., they preferred to remain in the darkness of ignorance rather than be instructed by -Christ: “They have rebelled against the light” (Jb 24:13); “Woe to you who substitute -darkness for light, and light for darkness” (Is 5:20).</p> -<p>And the cause of this perversity is that <span style="font-weight: bold">their deeds were evil: </span>and such deeds do not conform -to the light but seek the darkness: “Let us cast off the works of darkness” (Rom 13:12), i.e., -sins, which seek the darkness; “Those who sleep, sleep at night” (1 Thes 5:7); “The eye of the -adulterer watches for the darkness,” as we read in Job (24:15). Now it is by withdrawing from -the light,which is unpleasant to him, that one does not believe the light.</p> -<p>492 But do all unbelievers produce evil works? It seems not: for many Gentiles have acted -with virtue; for example, Cato, and many others. I answer, with Chrysostom, that is it one -thing to work by reason of virtue, and another by reason of a natural aptitude or disposition. -For some act well because of their natural disposition, because their temperament is not -inclined in a contrary way. And even unbelievers can act well in this way. For example, one -may live chastely because he is not assailed by concupiscence; and the same for the other -virtues. But those who act well by reason of virtue do not depart from virute, in spite of -inclinations to the contrary vice, because of the rightness of their reason and the goodness of -their will; and this is proper to believers.</p> -<p>Or, one might answer that although unbelievers may have done good things, they do not do -them for love of virute but out of vainglory. Further, they did not do all things well; for they +<p>484 Now he proves what he had said, as though by a process of +elimination, in the following way: Whoever will be judged will be +either a believer or an unbeliever. But I have not come to judge +unbelievers, because they are already judged. Therefore, from the +outset, God did not send his Son to judge the world. So first he +shows that believers are not judged. Secondly, that unbelievers are +notjudged (v 18).</p> +<p>485 He says therefore: I have not come to judge the world: +because he did not come to judge believers, for <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in him is not judged,</span> +with the judgment of condemnation, with which no one who believes +in him with faith informed by love is judged: “Whoever +believes ... will not encounter judgment, but will pass from death +to life” (below 5:24). But he is judged with the judgment of +reward and approval, of which the Apostle says: “It is the +Lord who judges me” (1 Cor 4:4).</p> +<p>486 But will there be many believing sinners who will not be +damned? I reply that some heretics [e.g., Origen] have said that no +believer, however great a sinner he may be, will be damned, but he +will be saved by reason of his foundation of salvation, namely, his +faith, although he may suffer some [temporary] punishment. They +take as the basis of their error the statement of the Apostle: +“No one can lay a foundation other that the one that has been +laid, that is, Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 3:11); and further on: +“If a man’s building burns ... he himself will be saved +as one fleeing through fire” (3:15).</p> +<p>But this view is clearly contrary to what the Apostle says in +Galatians (5:1): “It is obvious what proceeds from the flesh: +lewd conduct, impurity, licentiousness ... Those who do such things +will not inherit the kingdom of God.” Therefore we must say +that the foundation of salvation is not faith without charity +(unformed faith), but faith informed by charity. Significantly +therefore the Lord did not say, “whoever believes him,” +but <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever believes in him,</span> +that is, whoever by believing tends toward him through love +<span style="font-weight: bold">is not judged,</span> because he +does not sin mortally, thereby removing the foundation.</p> +<p>Or one could say, following Chrysostom, that everyone who acts +sinfully is not a believer: “They profess to know God, but +they deny him by their actions” (Ti 1:16); but only one who +acts worthily: “Show me your faith by your works” (Jas +2:18). It is only such a one who is not judged and not condemned +for unbelief.</p> +<p>487 Here [the Lord] shows that unbelievers are not judged. First +he makes the statement; secondly, he explains it (v 19).</p> +<p>488 Concerning the first we should note, according to Augustine, +that Christ does not say, “whoever does not believe is +judged,” but rather <span style="font-weight: bold">is not +judged.</span> This can be explained in three ways. For, according +to Augustine, whoever does not believe is not judged, because he is +already judged, not in fact, but in God’s foreknowledge, that +is, it is already known to God that he will be condemned: +“The Lord knows who are his” (2 Tim 2:19). In another +way: according to Chrysostom, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">whoever does not believe is already +judged,</span> that is, the very fact that he does not believe is +for him a condemnation: for not to believe is not to adhere to the +light—which is to live in darkness, and this is a momentous +condemnation: “All were bound with one chain of +darkness” (Wis 17:17). “What kind ofjoy can I have, I +who sit in darkness and do not see the light of heaven?” (Tb +5:12). In a third way: also according to Chrysostom, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">whoever does not believe is not judged,</span> +that is, being already condemned, he displays the obvious reason +for his condemnation. This is like saying that a person who is +proven guilty of death is already dead, even before the sentence of +death has been passed on him, because he is as good as dead.</p> +<p>Hence Gregory says that in passing judgments there is a twofold +order. Some will be sentenced by a trial; such are the ones who +have something not deserving of condemnation, namely, the good of +faith, that is, sinners who believe. But unbelievers, Whose reason +for condemnation is manifest, are sentenced without trial; and of +these it is said, <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever does not +believe is already judged.</span> “In judgment the wicked +will not stand” (Ps 1:6), that is, stand in trial.</p> +<p>489 It should be noted that to be judged is the same as to be +condemned; and to be condemned is to be shut out from salvation, to +which only one road leads, that is, the name of the Son of God: +“There is no other name under heaven given to men, by which +we are saved” (Acts 4:12); “O’God, save me by +your name” (Ps 53:3). Therefore, those who do not believe in +the Son of God are cut off from salvation, and the cause of their +damnation is evident.</p> +<p>490 Here the Lord explains his statement that unbelievers have +an evident cause for their condemnation. First, he sets forth the +sign which shows this. Secondly, the fittingness of this sign (v +20).</p> +<p>491 In the sign he sets forth he does three things. First, he +mentions the gift of God. Secondly, the perversity of mind in +unbelievers. Thirdly, the cause of this perversity.</p> +<p>So he says: It is abundantly clear that <span style= +"font-weight: bold">whoever does not believe is already +judged,</span> because <span style="font-weight: bold">the light +came into the world.</span> For men were in the darkness of +ignorance, and God destroyed this darkness by sending a light into +the world so that men might know the truth: “I am the light +of the world. He who follows me does not walk in darkness, but will +have the light of life” (below 8:12); “To enlighten +those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death” (Lk +1:78). Now the light came into the world because men could not come +to it: for “He dwells in inaccessible light, whom no man has +seen or is able to see” (1 Tim 6:16).</p> +<p>It is also clear from the perversity of mind in unbelievers who +<span style="font-weight: bold">loved darkness more than the +light,</span> i.e., they preferred to remain in the darkness of +ignorance rather than be instructed by Christ: “They have +rebelled against the light” (Jb 24:13); “Woe to you who +substitute darkness for light, and light for darkness” (Is +5:20).</p> +<p>And the cause of this perversity is that <span style= +"font-weight: bold">their deeds were evil:</span> and such deeds do +not conform to the light but seek the darkness: “Let us cast +off the works of darkness” (Rom 13:12), i.e., sins, which +seek the darkness; “Those who sleep, sleep at night” (1 +Thes 5:7); “The eye of the adulterer watches for the +darkness,” as we read in Job (24:15). Now it is by +withdrawing from the light,which is unpleasant to him, that one +does not believe the light.</p> +<p>492 But do all unbelievers produce evil works? It seems not: for +many Gentiles have acted with virtue; for example, Cato, and many +others. I answer, with Chrysostom, that is it one thing to work by +reason of virtue, and another by reason of a natural aptitude or +disposition. For some act well because of their natural +disposition, because their temperament is not inclined in a +contrary way. And even unbelievers can act well in this way. For +example, one may live chastely because he is not assailed by +concupiscence; and the same for the other virtues. But those who +act well by reason of virtue do not depart from virute, in spite of +inclinations to the contrary vice, because of the rightness of +their reason and the goodness of their will; and this is proper to +believers.</p> +<p>Or, one might answer that although unbelievers may have done +good things, they do not do them for love of virute but out of +vainglory. Further, they did not do all things well; for they failed to render to God the worship due him.</p> -<p>493 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Everyone who practices evil hates the light, </span>he shows the -appropriateness of the sign he used. First, with respect to those who are evil. Secondly, with -respect to the good.</p> -<p>494 So he says: The reason why they did not love the light is that their works were evil. And -this is plain because <span style="font-weight: bold">Everyone who practices evil hates the light. </span>He does not say, -“practiced,” but rather practices: because if someone has acted in an evil way, but has -repented and is sorry,seeing that he has done wrong, such a person does not hate the light but -comes to the light. But Everyone who practices evil, i.e., persists in evil, is not sorry, nor does -he come to the light, but he hates it; not because it reveals truth, but because it reveals a -person’s sins. For an evil person still wants to know the light and the truth; but he hates to be -unmasked by it. “If the dawn suddenly appears, they regard it as the shadow of death” Qb -24:17). And so he <span style="font-weight: bold">does not approach the light; </span>and this <span style="font-weight: bold">for fear that his deeds might be -exposed. </span>For no one who is unwilling to desert evil wants to be rebuked; this is fled from and -hated. “They hate the one who rebukes at the city gate” (Am 5:10); “A corrupt man does not -love the one who rebukes him” (Prv 15:12).</p> -<p>495 Now he shows the same things with respect to the good, who practice the truth, i.e., -perform good works. For truth is found not only in thought and words. but also in deeds. -Everyone of these <span style="font-weight: bold">comes to the light.</span></p> -<p>But did anyone practice the truth before Christ? It seems not, for to practice the truth is not to -sin; and “before Christ all have sinned” (Rom 3:23). I answer, according to Augustine, that he -practices the truth in himself who is displeased at the evil he has done; and after leaving the -darkness, keeps himself from sin, and repenting of the past, <span style="font-weight: bold">comes to the light, </span>with the -special intention of making his actions known.</p> -<p>496 But this conflicts with the teaching that no one should make public the good he has done; -and this was a reason why the Lord rebuked the Pharisees. I answer that it is lawful to want -one’s works to be seen by God so that they may be approved: “It is not the one who -commends himself who is approved, but the one whom God commends” (2 Cor 10:18); “My -witness is in heaven,” as is said in Job (16:20). It is also lawful to want them to be seen by -one’s own conscience, so that one may rejoice: “Our glory is this: the testimony of our -conscience” (2 Cor 1:12). But it is reprehensible to want them to be seen by men in order to -be praised or for one’s own glory. Yet, holy persons desire that their good works be known to -men for the sake of God’s glory and for the good of the faith: “Let your light so shine before -men that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father in heaven” (Mt 5:16). Such a -person <span style="font-weight: bold">comes to the light to make clear that his deeds are done in God, </span>that is, according -to God’s commandment or through the grace of God. For whatever good we do, whether it be -avoiding sin, repenting of what has been done, or doing good works, it is all from God: “You -have accomplished all our works” (Is 26:12).</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 4</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p>22 After this Jesus and his disciples came to Judean territory; he stayed there with his -disciples and was baptizing. 23 But John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, where the -water was plentiful, and people kept coming and were baptized. 24 John, of course, had not -yet been thrown into prison. 25 A controversy arose between the disciples of John and the -Jews concerning purification. 26 They went to John and said to him, “Rabbi, the man who -was with you across the Jordan, the one of whom you have given testimony, he is here -baptizing, and all the people are flocking to him.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>497 Above, the Lord gave us his teaching on spiritual regeneration in words, here he -completes his teaching through action, by baptizing. First, two kinds of baptism are -mentioned. Secondly, a question about their relationship is raised (v 25). As to the first, two -things are done. Mention is first made of the baptism of Christ. Secondly, of the baptism of -John.</p> -<p>498 He says first, <span style="font-weight: bold">After this, </span>i.e., the teaching on spiritual regeneration, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus and his -disciples came to Judean territory. </span>There is a question here about the literal meaning. For -above, the Evangelist had said that the Lord had come from Galilee to Jerusalem, which is in -Judean territory, where he taught Nicodemus. So how, after teaching Nicodemus, can he -come into Judea, since he was already there?</p> -<p>Two answers are given to this. According to Bede, after his discussion with Nicodemus, -Christ went to Galilee, and after remaining there for a time, returned to Judea. And so <span style="font-weight: bold">After -this Jesus and his disciples came to Judean territory, </span>should not be understood to mean -that he came into Judea immediately after his talk with Nicodemus. Another explanation, -given by Chrysostom, is that he did come into the territory of Judea immediately after this -discussion: for Christ wanted to preach where the people gathered, so that many might be -converted: “I have declared your justice in the great assembly” (Ps 3 9:10); “1 have spoken -openly to the world” (below 18:20). Now there were two places in Judea where the Jewish -people gathered: Jerusalem, where they went for their feasts, and the Jordan, where they -gathered on account of John’s preaching and his baptism. And so the Lord used to visit both -places; and after the feast days were over in Jerusalem, which is in one part of Judea, he went -to another part, to the Jordan, where John was baptizing.</p> -<p>499 As for the moral sense, Judea means “confession,” to which Jesus came, for Christ visits -those who confess their sins or speak in praise of God: “Judea became his sanctuary” (Ps -113:2). He stayed there, because he did not make a merely temporary visit: “We will come to -him, and make our abode with him,” as it says below (14:23). <span style="font-weight: bold">And was baptizing, </span>i.e., -cleansing from sin; because unless one confesses his sins he does not obtain forgiveness: “He -who hides his sins will not prosper” (Prv 28:13).</p> -<p>500 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But John also was baptizing, </span>the Evangelist presents the baptism of -John. And in regard to this he does four things. First, he presents the person who is baptizing. -Secondly, the place of the baptism. Thirdly, its fruit. Fourthly, the time.</p> -<p>501 John is the person who is baptizing-, so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">John also was baptizing. </span>There is a -question about this: Since John’s baptism was ordained to the baptism of Christ, it seems that -John should have stopped baptizing when Christ started to baptize, just as the symbol does -not continue when the truth comes. Three reasons are given for this. The first is in relation to -Christ, for John baptized in order that Christ might be baptized by him. But it was not fitting -that John baptize just Christ; otherwise, on this point alone, it might seem that John’s baptism -was superior to Christ’s. Accordingly, it was expedient that John baptize others before Christ, -because before Christ’s teaching was to be made public it was necessary that men be prepared -for Christ by John’s baptism. In this way, the baptism of John is related to the baptism of -Christ as the catechesis or religious instruction given to prospects to teach and prepare them -for baptism is related to the true baptism. It was likewise important that John baptize others -after he had baptized Christ, so that John’s baptism would not seem to be worthless. For the -same reason, the practice of the ceremonies of the old law was not abolished as soon as the -truth came, but as Augustine says, the Jews could lawfully observe them for a time.</p> -<p>The second reason relates to John. For if John had stopped baptizing at once after Christ -began baptizing, it might have been thought that he stopped out of envy or anger. And -because, as the Apostle says, “We ought to look after what is good, not only before God, but -also before all men” (Rom 12:17), this is the reason why John did not stop at once.</p> -<p>The third reason relates to John’s disciples, who were already beginning to act like zealots -toward Christ and his disciples, because they were baptizing. So if John had entirely stopped -from baptizing, it would have provoked his disciples to an even greater zeal and opposition to -Christ and his disciples. For even while John continued baptizing, they were hostile to -Christ’s baptism, as later events showed. And so John did not stop at once: “Take care that -your freedom does not become a hindrance to those who are weak,” as is said in 1 -Corinthians (8:9).</p> -<p>502 The place of his baptism was <span style="font-weight: bold">at Aenon near Salim, where the water was plentiful. -</span>Another name for Salim is Salem, which is the village from which the king Melchizedek -came. It is called Salim here because among the Jews a reader may use any vowel he chooses -in the middle of his words; hence it made no difference to the Jews whether it was -pronounced Salim or Salem. He added, <span style="font-weight: bold">where the water was plentiful, </span>to explain the name -of this place, i.e., <span style="font-weight: bold">Aenon, </span>which is the same as “water.”</p> -<p>503 The fruit of his baptism is the remission of sins; thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">people kept coming and -were baptized, </span>i.e., cleansed: for as is stated in Matthew (3:5) and in Luke (3:7), great -crowds came to John.</p> -<p>504 The time is indicated when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">John had not yet been thrown into prison. </span>He says -this so that we may know that he began his narrative of Christ’s life before the other -Evangelists. For the others began their account only from the time of John’s imprisonment. -So Matthew (4:12) says: “When Jesus heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew into -Galilee.” And so, because they had passed over the things that Christ did before John’s -imprisonment, John, who was the last to write a Gospel, supplied these omissions. He -suggests this when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">John had not yet been thrown into prison.</span></p> -<p>505 Note that by divine arrangement it came about that when Christ began to baptize, John -did not continue his own baptizing and preaching for very long, in order not to create -disunion among the people. But he was granted a little time so that it would not seem that he -deserved to be repudiated, as was mentioned before. Again, by God’s arrangement, it came -about that after the faith had been preached and the faithful converted, the temple was utterly -destroyed, in order that all the devotion and hope of the faithful could be directed to Christ.</p> -<p>506 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">A controversy arose</span>, he brings in the issue of the two baptisms. -First, the issue is mentioned. Secondly, it is brought to John’s attention (v 26). Thirdly, the -issue is resolved.</p> -<p>507 Because both John and Christ were baptizing, the disciples of John, out of zeal for their -teacher, started a controversy over this. And this is what he says, A controversy arose, i.e., a -dispute, <span style="font-weight: bold">between the disciples of John, </span>who were the first to raise the issue, <span style="font-weight: bold">and the Jews, -</span>whom the disciples of John had rebuked for preferring Christ, because of the miracles he did, -to John, who did not do any miracles. The issue was <span style="font-weight: bold">concerning purification, </span>i.e., baptizing. -The cause of their envy and the reason why they started the controversy was the fact that John -sent those he baptized to Christ, but Christ did not send those he baptized to John. It seemed -from this, and perhaps the Jews even said so, that Christ was greater than John. Thus, the -disciples of John, having not yet become spiritual, quarreled with the Jews over the baptisms. -“While there is envy and fighting among you, are you not carnal?” (1 Cor 3:3).</p> -<p>508 They referred this issue to John; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">They went to John. </span>If we examine this -closely, we see that they were trying to incite John against Christ. Indeed, they are like the -gossip and the double-tongued: “Those who gossip and are double-tongued are accursed, for -they disturb many who are at peace” (Sir 28:15).</p> -<p>So they bring up four things calculated to set John against Christ. First, they recall the -previous unimportant status of Christ. Secondly, the good John did for him. Thirdly, the role -which Christ took on. Fourthly, the loss to John because of Christ’s new role.</p> -<p>509 They recall Christ’s unimportance when they say, <span style="font-weight: bold">the man who was with you, </span>as one of -your disciples; and not the one you were with as your teacher. For there is no good reason for -envy if honor is shown to one who is greater; rather, envy is aroused when honor is given to -an inferior: “I have seen slaves on horses, and princes walking like slaves” (Ecc 10:7); “I -called my servant, and he did not answer me” (Jb 19:16). For a master is more disturbed at -the rebellion of a servant and a subject than of anyone else.</p> -<p>510 Secondly, they remind John of the good he did Christ. Thus they do not say, “the one -whom you baptized,” because they would then be admitting the greatness of Christ which was -shown during his baptism when the Holy Spirit came upon him in the form of a dove and in -the voice of the Father speaking to him. So they say, <span style="font-weight: bold">the one of whom you have given -testimony, </span>i.e., we are very angry that the one you made famous and admired dares to repay -you in this way: “The one who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me” (Ps 40:10). They -said this because those who seek their own glory and personal profit from their office become -dejected if their office is taken over by someone else</p> -<p>511 And so thirdly, they even add that Christ took over John’s office for himself, when they -say, <span style="font-weight: bold">he is here baptizing, </span>i.e., he is exercising your office; and this also distrubed them very -much. For we generally see that men of the same craft are envious and underhanded with -respect to one another; a potter envies another potter, but does not envy a carpenter. So, even -teachers, who are seeking their own honor, become sad if another teaches the truth. In -opposition to them, Gregory says: “The mind of a holy pastor wishes that others teach the -truth which he cannot teach all by himself.” So also Moses: “Would that all the people might -prophesy,” as we read in Numbers (11:29).</p> -<p>512 Yet they were not satisfied with merely disturbing John, rather they report something that -should really excite him, that is, the loss that John seemed to be having because of the office -Christ took over. They give this when they say: <span style="font-weight: bold">and all the people are flocking to him, </span>i.e., -the ones who used to come to you. In other words, they have rejected and disowned you, and -now are all going to his baptism. It is clear from Matthew (11:7) that they used to go to John: -“What did you go into the desert to see?” The same envy affected the Pharisees against -Christ; so they said: “Look, the whole world has gone after him” (below 12:19). However, all -this did not set John againt Christ, for he was not a reed swaying in the wind, and this is clear -from John’s answer to their question.</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 5</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p>27 John replied and said:</p> -<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“No one can lay hold of anything -<br>unless it is given to him from heaven. -<p>28 “You yourselves are witnesses to the fact that I said: I am not the Christ, but the one sent -before him.</p> -<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">>29 “It is the groom who has the bride. -<br>The groom’s friend waits there and listens to him, -<br>rejoicing at hearing his voice. -<br>Therefore in this case my joy is complete. -<br>30 He must increase, -<br>and I must decrease. -<br>31 The One who came from above -<br>is above all things. -<br>He who is of earth is earthly, -<br>and speaks of earthly things. -<br>32a The One who comes from heaven -<br>is above all things, -<br>and he testifies to what he sees, -<BR>and to what he hears.</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>513 Here we have John’s answer to the question presented to him by his disciples. Their -question contained two points: a complaint about the office Christ took on, and so they said, -<span style="font-weight: bold">he is here baptizing; </span>and about Christ’s increasing fame and reputation among the people, -and so they said, <span style="font-weight: bold">all the people are flocking to him. </span>Accordingly, John directs his answer to -these two complaints. First he answers the complaint about the office Christ took on. -Secondly, the complaint about Christ’s increasing reputation (v 30). As to the first he does -two things. First, he shows the source of Christ’s office and of his own. Secondly, their -difference (v 28). Thirdly, how Christ and he are related to these offices.</p> -<p>514 As to the first, note that although John’s disciples broach their question maliciously, and -so deserve to be rebuked, John nevertheless does not sharply reprove them; and this because -of their imperfection. For he feared that they might be provoked by a rebuke, leave him, and, -joining forces with the Pharisees, publicly harass Christ. In acting this way he was putting -into practice what is said of the Lord: “The burised reed he will not break” (Is 42:3). Again, -we should also note that he begins his answer not by telling them what is great and wonderful -about Christ, but what is common and obvious; and he did this on account oftheir envy. For -since the excellence of a person provokes others to envy, if John had stressed Christ’s -excellence at once, he would have fed the fire of their envy.</p> -<p>515 Thus he states something unpretentious, and says, <span style="font-weight: bold">No one can lay hold of anything -unless it is given to him from heaven; </span>and he said this to them in order to inspire them with -reverence. As if to say: If all men are going to him, it is God’s doing, because <span style="font-weight: bold">no one can lay -hold of anything, </span>in the order of perfection and goodness, unless it is given to him from -heaven. Therefore, if you oppose him, you oppose God. “If this plan or work is from men, it -will fail,” as is said in Acts (5:38). This is the way Chrysostom explains it, applying these +<p>493 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Everyone +who practices evil hates the light,</span> he shows the +appropriateness of the sign he used. First, with respect to those +who are evil. Secondly, with respect to the good.</p> +<p>494 So he says: The reason why they did not love the light is +that their works were evil. And this is plain because <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Everyone who practices evil hates the +light.</span> He does not say, “practiced,” but rather +practices: because if someone has acted in an evil way, but has +repented and is sorry,seeing that he has done wrong, such a person +does not hate the light but comes to the light. But Everyone who +practices evil, i.e., persists in evil, is not sorry, nor does he +come to the light, but he hates it; not because it reveals truth, +but because it reveals a person’s sins. For an evil person +still wants to know the light and the truth; but he hates to be +unmasked by it. “If the dawn suddenly appears, they regard it +as the shadow of death” Qb 24:17). And so he <span style= +"font-weight: bold">does not approach the light;</span> and this +<span style="font-weight: bold">for fear that his deeds might be +exposed.</span> For no one who is unwilling to desert evil wants to +be rebuked; this is fled from and hated. “They hate the one +who rebukes at the city gate” (Am 5:10); “A corrupt man +does not love the one who rebukes him” (Prv 15:12).</p> +<p>495 Now he shows the same things with respect to the good, who +practice the truth, i.e., perform good works. For truth is found +not only in thought and words. but also in deeds. Everyone of these +<span style="font-weight: bold">comes to the light.</span></p> +<p>But did anyone practice the truth before Christ? It seems not, +for to practice the truth is not to sin; and “before Christ +all have sinned” (Rom 3:23). I answer, according to +Augustine, that he practices the truth in himself who is displeased +at the evil he has done; and after leaving the darkness, keeps +himself from sin, and repenting of the past, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">comes to the light,</span> with the special +intention of making his actions known.</p> +<p>496 But this conflicts with the teaching that no one should make +public the good he has done; and this was a reason why the Lord +rebuked the Pharisees. I answer that it is lawful to want +one’s works to be seen by God so that they may be approved: +“It is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but +the one whom God commends” (2 Cor 10:18); “My witness +is in heaven,” as is said in Job (16:20). It is also lawful +to want them to be seen by one’s own conscience, so that one +may rejoice: “Our glory is this: the testimony of our +conscience” (2 Cor 1:12). But it is reprehensible to want +them to be seen by men in order to be praised or for one’s +own glory. Yet, holy persons desire that their good works be known +to men for the sake of God’s glory and for the good of the +faith: “Let your light so shine before men that they may see +your good works, and glorify your Father in heaven” (Mt +5:16). Such a person <span style="font-weight: bold">comes to the +light to make clear that his deeds are done in God,</span> that is, +according to God’s commandment or through the grace of God. +For whatever good we do, whether it be avoiding sin, repenting of +what has been done, or doing good works, it is all from God: +“You have accomplished all our works” (Is 26:12).</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 4</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p>22 After this Jesus and his disciples came to Judean territory; +he stayed there with his disciples and was baptizing. 23 But John +also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, where the water was +plentiful, and people kept coming and were baptized. 24 John, of +course, had not yet been thrown into prison. 25 A controversy arose +between the disciples of John and the Jews concerning purification. +26 They went to John and said to him, “Rabbi, the man who was +with you across the Jordan, the one of whom you have given +testimony, he is here baptizing, and all the people are flocking to +him.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>497 Above, the Lord gave us his teaching on spiritual +regeneration in words, here he completes his teaching through +action, by baptizing. First, two kinds of baptism are mentioned. +Secondly, a question about their relationship is raised (v 25). As +to the first, two things are done. Mention is first made of the +baptism of Christ. Secondly, of the baptism of John.</p> +<p>498 He says first, <span style="font-weight: bold">After +this,</span> i.e., the teaching on spiritual regeneration, +<span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus and his disciples came to +Judean territory.</span> There is a question here about the literal +meaning. For above, the Evangelist had said that the Lord had come +from Galilee to Jerusalem, which is in Judean territory, where he +taught Nicodemus. So how, after teaching Nicodemus, can he come +into Judea, since he was already there?</p> +<p>Two answers are given to this. According to Bede, after his +discussion with Nicodemus, Christ went to Galilee, and after +remaining there for a time, returned to Judea. And so <span style= +"font-weight: bold">After this Jesus and his disciples came to +Judean territory,</span> should not be understood to mean that he +came into Judea immediately after his talk with Nicodemus. Another +explanation, given by Chrysostom, is that he did come into the +territory of Judea immediately after this discussion: for Christ +wanted to preach where the people gathered, so that many might be +converted: “I have declared your justice in the great +assembly” (Ps 3 9:10); “1 have spoken openly to the +world” (below 18:20). Now there were two places in Judea +where the Jewish people gathered: Jerusalem, where they went for +their feasts, and the Jordan, where they gathered on account of +John’s preaching and his baptism. And so the Lord used to +visit both places; and after the feast days were over in Jerusalem, +which is in one part of Judea, he went to another part, to the +Jordan, where John was baptizing.</p> +<p>499 As for the moral sense, Judea means +“confession,” to which Jesus came, for Christ visits +those who confess their sins or speak in praise of God: +“Judea became his sanctuary” (Ps 113:2). He stayed +there, because he did not make a merely temporary visit: “We +will come to him, and make our abode with him,” as it says +below (14:23). <span style="font-weight: bold">And was +baptizing,</span> i.e., cleansing from sin; because unless one +confesses his sins he does not obtain forgiveness: “He who +hides his sins will not prosper” (Prv 28:13).</p> +<p>500 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But John +also was baptizing,</span> the Evangelist presents the baptism of +John. And in regard to this he does four things. First, he presents +the person who is baptizing. Secondly, the place of the baptism. +Thirdly, its fruit. Fourthly, the time.</p> +<p>501 John is the person who is baptizing-, so he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">John also was baptizing.</span> +There is a question about this: Since John’s baptism was +ordained to the baptism of Christ, it seems that John should have +stopped baptizing when Christ started to baptize, just as the +symbol does not continue when the truth comes. Three reasons are +given for this. The first is in relation to Christ, for John +baptized in order that Christ might be baptized by him. But it was +not fitting that John baptize just Christ; otherwise, on this point +alone, it might seem that John’s baptism was superior to +Christ’s. Accordingly, it was expedient that John baptize +others before Christ, because before Christ’s teaching was to +be made public it was necessary that men be prepared for Christ by +John’s baptism. In this way, the baptism of John is related +to the baptism of Christ as the catechesis or religious instruction +given to prospects to teach and prepare them for baptism is related +to the true baptism. It was likewise important that John baptize +others after he had baptized Christ, so that John’s baptism +would not seem to be worthless. For the same reason, the practice +of the ceremonies of the old law was not abolished as soon as the +truth came, but as Augustine says, the Jews could lawfully observe +them for a time.</p> +<p>The second reason relates to John. For if John had stopped +baptizing at once after Christ began baptizing, it might have been +thought that he stopped out of envy or anger. And because, as the +Apostle says, “We ought to look after what is good, not only +before God, but also before all men” (Rom 12:17), this is the +reason why John did not stop at once.</p> +<p>The third reason relates to John’s disciples, who were +already beginning to act like zealots toward Christ and his +disciples, because they were baptizing. So if John had entirely +stopped from baptizing, it would have provoked his disciples to an +even greater zeal and opposition to Christ and his disciples. For +even while John continued baptizing, they were hostile to +Christ’s baptism, as later events showed. And so John did not +stop at once: “Take care that your freedom does not become a +hindrance to those who are weak,” as is said in 1 Corinthians +(8:9).</p> +<p>502 The place of his baptism was <span style= +"font-weight: bold">at Aenon near Salim, where the water was +plentiful.</span> Another name for Salim is Salem, which is the +village from which the king Melchizedek came. It is called Salim +here because among the Jews a reader may use any vowel he chooses +in the middle of his words; hence it made no difference to the Jews +whether it was pronounced Salim or Salem. He added, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">where the water was plentiful,</span> to +explain the name of this place, i.e., <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Aenon,</span> which is the same as +“water.”</p> +<p>503 The fruit of his baptism is the remission of sins; thus he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">people kept coming and were +baptized,</span> i.e., cleansed: for as is stated in Matthew (3:5) +and in Luke (3:7), great crowds came to John.</p> +<p>504 The time is indicated when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">John had not yet been thrown into +prison.</span> He says this so that we may know that he began his +narrative of Christ’s life before the other Evangelists. For +the others began their account only from the time of John’s +imprisonment. So Matthew (4:12) says: “When Jesus heard that +John had been arrested, he withdrew into Galilee.” And so, +because they had passed over the things that Christ did before +John’s imprisonment, John, who was the last to write a +Gospel, supplied these omissions. He suggests this when he says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">John had not yet been thrown into +prison.</span></p> +<p>505 Note that by divine arrangement it came about that when +Christ began to baptize, John did not continue his own baptizing +and preaching for very long, in order not to create disunion among +the people. But he was granted a little time so that it would not +seem that he deserved to be repudiated, as was mentioned before. +Again, by God’s arrangement, it came about that after the +faith had been preached and the faithful converted, the temple was +utterly destroyed, in order that all the devotion and hope of the +faithful could be directed to Christ.</p> +<p>506 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">A +controversy arose</span>, he brings in the issue of the two +baptisms. First, the issue is mentioned. Secondly, it is brought to +John’s attention (v 26). Thirdly, the issue is resolved.</p> +<p>507 Because both John and Christ were baptizing, the disciples +of John, out of zeal for their teacher, started a controversy over +this. And this is what he says, A controversy arose, i.e., a +dispute, <span style="font-weight: bold">between the disciples of +John,</span> who were the first to raise the issue, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and the Jews,</span> whom the disciples of John +had rebuked for preferring Christ, because of the miracles he did, +to John, who did not do any miracles. The issue was <span style= +"font-weight: bold">concerning purification,</span> i.e., +baptizing. The cause of their envy and the reason why they started +the controversy was the fact that John sent those he baptized to +Christ, but Christ did not send those he baptized to John. It +seemed from this, and perhaps the Jews even said so, that Christ +was greater than John. Thus, the disciples of John, having not yet +become spiritual, quarreled with the Jews over the baptisms. +“While there is envy and fighting among you, are you not +carnal?” (1 Cor 3:3).</p> +<p>508 They referred this issue to John; hence he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">They went to John.</span> If we +examine this closely, we see that they were trying to incite John +against Christ. Indeed, they are like the gossip and the +double-tongued: “Those who gossip and are double-tongued are +accursed, for they disturb many who are at peace” (Sir +28:15).</p> +<p>So they bring up four things calculated to set John against +Christ. First, they recall the previous unimportant status of +Christ. Secondly, the good John did for him. Thirdly, the role +which Christ took on. Fourthly, the loss to John because of +Christ’s new role.</p> +<p>509 They recall Christ’s unimportance when they say, +<span style="font-weight: bold">the man who was with you,</span> as +one of your disciples; and not the one you were with as your +teacher. For there is no good reason for envy if honor is shown to +one who is greater; rather, envy is aroused when honor is given to +an inferior: “I have seen slaves on horses, and princes +walking like slaves” (Ecc 10:7); “I called my servant, +and he did not answer me” (Jb 19:16). For a master is more +disturbed at the rebellion of a servant and a subject than of +anyone else.</p> +<p>510 Secondly, they remind John of the good he did Christ. Thus +they do not say, “the one whom you baptized,” because +they would then be admitting the greatness of Christ which was +shown during his baptism when the Holy Spirit came upon him in the +form of a dove and in the voice of the Father speaking to him. So +they say, <span style="font-weight: bold">the one of whom you have +given testimony,</span> i.e., we are very angry that the one you +made famous and admired dares to repay you in this way: “The +one who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me” (Ps +40:10). They said this because those who seek their own glory and +personal profit from their office become dejected if their office +is taken over by someone else</p> +<p>511 And so thirdly, they even add that Christ took over +John’s office for himself, when they say, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">he is here baptizing,</span> i.e., he is +exercising your office; and this also distrubed them very much. For +we generally see that men of the same craft are envious and +underhanded with respect to one another; a potter envies another +potter, but does not envy a carpenter. So, even teachers, who are +seeking their own honor, become sad if another teaches the truth. +In opposition to them, Gregory says: “The mind of a holy +pastor wishes that others teach the truth which he cannot teach all +by himself.” So also Moses: “Would that all the people +might prophesy,” as we read in Numbers (11:29).</p> +<p>512 Yet they were not satisfied with merely disturbing John, +rather they report something that should really excite him, that +is, the loss that John seemed to be having because of the office +Christ took over. They give this when they say: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and all the people are flocking to him,</span> +i.e., the ones who used to come to you. In other words, they have +rejected and disowned you, and now are all going to his baptism. It +is clear from Matthew (11:7) that they used to go to John: +“What did you go into the desert to see?” The same envy +affected the Pharisees against Christ; so they said: “Look, +the whole world has gone after him” (below 12:19). However, +all this did not set John againt Christ, for he was not a reed +swaying in the wind, and this is clear from John’s answer to +their question.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 5</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p>27 John replied and said:</p> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“No one can lay hold of +anything<br /> +unless it is given to him from heaven.</p> +<p>28 “You yourselves are witnesses to the fact that I said: +I am not the Christ, but the one sent before him.</p> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">>29 “It is the groom who has +the bride.<br /> +The groom’s friend waits there and listens to him,<br /> +rejoicing at hearing his voice.<br /> +Therefore in this case my joy is complete.<br /> +30 He must increase,<br /> +and I must decrease.<br /> +31 The One who came from above<br /> +is above all things.<br /> +He who is of earth is earthly,<br /> +and speaks of earthly things.<br /> +32a The One who comes from heaven<br /> +is above all things,<br /> +and he testifies to what he sees,<br /> +and to what he hears.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>513 Here we have John’s answer to the question presented +to him by his disciples. Their question contained two points: a +complaint about the office Christ took on, and so they said, +<span style="font-weight: bold">he is here baptizing;</span> and +about Christ’s increasing fame and reputation among the +people, and so they said, <span style="font-weight: bold">all the +people are flocking to him.</span> Accordingly, John directs his +answer to these two complaints. First he answers the complaint +about the office Christ took on. Secondly, the complaint about +Christ’s increasing reputation (v 30). As to the first he +does two things. First, he shows the source of Christ’s +office and of his own. Secondly, their difference (v 28). Thirdly, +how Christ and he are related to these offices.</p> +<p>514 As to the first, note that although John’s disciples +broach their question maliciously, and so deserve to be rebuked, +John nevertheless does not sharply reprove them; and this because +of their imperfection. For he feared that they might be provoked by +a rebuke, leave him, and, joining forces with the Pharisees, +publicly harass Christ. In acting this way he was putting into +practice what is said of the Lord: “The burised reed he will +not break” (Is 42:3). Again, we should also note that he +begins his answer not by telling them what is great and wonderful +about Christ, but what is common and obvious; and he did this on +account oftheir envy. For since the excellence of a person provokes +others to envy, if John had stressed Christ’s excellence at +once, he would have fed the fire of their envy.</p> +<p>515 Thus he states something unpretentious, and says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">No one can lay hold of anything +unless it is given to him from heaven;</span> and he said this to +them in order to inspire them with reverence. As if to say: If all +men are going to him, it is God’s doing, because <span style= +"font-weight: bold">no one can lay hold of anything,</span> in the +order of perfection and goodness, unless it is given to him from +heaven. Therefore, if you oppose him, you oppose God. “If +this plan or work is from men, it will fail,” as is said in +Acts (5:38). This is the way Chrysostom explains it, applying these words to Christ.</p> -<p>Augustine, on the other hand, does much better when he refers them to John. <span style="font-weight: bold">No one can lay -hold of anything unless it is given to him from heaven: </span>as if to say: You are zealous on my -behalf and you want me to be greater than Christ; but that has not been given to me, and I do -not wish to usurp it: “No one takes this honor on himself” (Heb 5:4). This is the origin of -their offices.</p> -<p>516 Then follows the difference of their offices, when he says, You yourselves are witnesses. -As if to say: From the testimony which I bore to him, you can know the office committed to -me by Christ: for You yourselves are witnesses, i.e., you can testify, <span style="font-weight: bold">to the fact that I said: I -am not the Christ</span>—“He declared openly and did not deny” (above 1:20)—<span style="font-weight: bold">but the one sent -before him, </span>as a herald before a judge. And so from my own testimony you can know my -office, which is to go before Christ and prepare the way for him: “There was a man sent by -God, whose name was John” (above 1:6). But the office of Christ is to judge and to preside. If -we look at this closely we can see that John, like a skilful disputant, answers them with their -own arguments: “I judge you out of your own mouth,” as said in Luke (19:22).</p> -<p>517 He shows how John is related to his own office when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">It is the groom who has -the bride. </span>First, he gives a simile. Secondly, he applies it to his own situation. With respect -to the first he does two things. First, he gives a simile which applies to Christ; and secondly, -to himself.</p> -<p>518 As to the first, we should note that on the human level it is the groom who regulates, -governs and has the bride. Hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">It is the groom who has the bride. </span>Now the -groom is Christ: “Like a bridegroom coming out of his bridal chamber” (Ps 18:6). His bride is -the Church, which is joined to him by faith: “I will espouse you to myself in faith” Mos 2:20). -In keeping with this figure, Zipporah said to Moses: “You are a spouse of blood to me” (Ex -4:25). We read of the marriage: “The marriage of the Lamb has come” (Rv 19:7). So, because -Christ is the groom, he has the bride, that is, the Church; but my part is only to rejoice in the -fact that he has the bride.</p> -<p>519 Consequently he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The groom’s friend waits there and listens to him, rejoicing at -hearing his voice. </span>Although John had said earlier that he was not worthy to unfasten the strap -of Jesus’ sandal, he here calls himself the friend of Jesus in order to bring out the faithfulness -of his love for Christ. For a servant does not act in the spirit of love in regard to the things -that pertain to his master, but in a spirit of servitude; while a friend, on the other hand, seeks -his friend’s interests out of love and faithfulness. Hence a faithful servant is like a friend to -his master: “If you have a faithful servant, treat him like yourself” (Sir 33:31). Indeed, it is -proof of a servant’s faithfulness when he rejoices in the prosperity of his master, and when he -obtains various goods, not for himself, but for his master. And so because John did not keep -the bride entrusted to his care for himself, but for the groom, we can see that he was a faithful -servant and a friend of the groom. It is to suggest this that he calls himself <span style="font-weight: bold">the groom’s -friend.</span></p> -<p>Those who are friends of the truth should act in the same way, not turning the bride entrusted -to their care to their own advantage and glory, but treating her honorably for the honor and -glory of the groom; otherwise they would not be friends of the groom but adulterers. This is -why Gregory says that a servant who is sent by the groom with gifts for the bride is guilty of -adulterous thoughts if he himself desires to please the bride. This is not what the Apostle did: -“I espoused you to one husband in order to present you to Christ as a chaste virgin” (2 Cor -11:2). And John did the same, because he did not keep the bride, i.e., the faithful, for himself, -but brought them to the groom, that is, to Christ.</p> -<p>520 And so by saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">the groom’s friend, </span>he suggests the faithfulness of his love. Further, -he suggests his constancy when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">waits, </span>firm in friendship and faithfulness, not -extolling himself above what he really is: “I will stand my watch” (Hb 2:1); “Be steadfast and -unchanging” (1 Cor 15:58); “A faithful friend, if he is constant, is like another self” (Sir -6:11).</p> -<p>He suggests his attention when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and listens to him, </span>i.e., attentively considers the way -in which the groom is united to the bride. For according to Chrysostom, these words explain -the manner of this marriage, for it is accomplished through faith, and “faith comes through -hearing” (Rom 10:17). Or, he <span style="font-weight: bold">listens to him, </span>i.e., reverently obeys him, by caring for the -bride according to the commands of the groom: “I will listen to him as my master,” as is said -in Isaiah (50:4). This is in opposition to those evil prelates who do not follow Christ’s -command in governing the Church.</p> -<p>Likewise, he hints at his spiritual joy when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">rejoicing at hearing his voice, </span>that is, -when the groom talks to his bride. And he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">rejoicing </span>(literally, “rejoicing with joy”), to -show the truth and perfection of his joy. For one whose rejoicing is not over the good, does -not rejoice with true joy. And so, if it made me sad that Christ, who is the true groom, -preaches to the bride, i.e., the Church, I would not be a friend of the groom; but I am not sad.</p> -<p>521 Therefore in this case my joy is complete, namely, in seeing what I have so long desired, -that is, the groom speaking to his bride. Or, my joy is complete, i.e., brought to its perfect and -due measure, when the bride. is united to the groom, because I now have my grace and I have -completed my work: “I will rejoice in the Lord, and I will take joy in God, my Jesus” (Hb -3:18).</p> -<p>522 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">He must increase, and I must decrease, </span>he answers their question -as to their complaint about the increasing esteem given to Christ. First, he notes that such an -increase is fitting. Secondly, he gives the reason for it (v 31).</p> -<p>523 So he says: You say that all the people are flocking to him, i.e., to Christ, and therefore -that he is growing in honor and esteem among the people. But I say that this is not -unbecoming, because He must increase, not in himself, but in relation to others, in the sense -that his power becoipe more and more known. <span style="font-weight: bold">And I must decrease, </span>in the reverence and -esteem of the people: for esteem and reverence are not due to me as if I were a principal; but -they are due to Christ. And therefore since he has come, the signs of honor are diminishing in -my regard, but increasing in regard to Christ, just as with the coming of the prince, the office -of the ambassador ceases: “When the perfect comes, what is imperfect will pass away” (1 Cor -13:10). And just as in the heavens the morning star appears and gives light before the sun, -only to cease giving light when the sun appears, so John went before Christ and is compared -to the morning star: “Can you bring out the morning star?” (Jb 38:32).</p> -<p>This is also signified in John’s birth and in his death. In his birth, because John was born at a -time when the days are getting shorter; Christ, however, was born when the days are growing -longer, on the twenty-fifth of December. In his death, because John dies shortened by -decapitation; but Christ died raised up by the lifting up of the cross.</p> -<p>524 In the moral sense, this should take place in each one of us. Christ must increase in you, -i.e., you should grow in the knowledge and love of Christ, because the more you are able to -grasp him by knowledge and love, the more Christ increases in you; just as the more one -improves in seeing one and the same light, the more that light seems to increase. -Consequently, as men advance in this way, their self-esteem decreases; because the more one -knows of the divine greatness, the less he thinks of his human smallness. As we read in -Proverbs (30:1): “The revelation spoken by the man close to God”; and then there follows: “I -am the most foolish of men, and the wisdom of men is not in me.” “I have heard you, but now -I see you, and so I reprove myself, and do penance in dust and ashes,” as we read in Job +<p>Augustine, on the other hand, does much better when he refers +them to John. <span style="font-weight: bold">No one can lay hold +of anything unless it is given to him from heaven:</span> as if to +say: You are zealous on my behalf and you want me to be greater +than Christ; but that has not been given to me, and I do not wish +to usurp it: “No one takes this honor on himself” (Heb +5:4). This is the origin of their offices.</p> +<p>516 Then follows the difference of their offices, when he says, +You yourselves are witnesses. As if to say: From the testimony +which I bore to him, you can know the office committed to me by +Christ: for You yourselves are witnesses, i.e., you can testify, +<span style="font-weight: bold">to the fact that I said: I am not +the Christ</span>—“He declared openly and did not +deny” (above 1:20)—<span style="font-weight: bold">but +the one sent before him,</span> as a herald before a judge. And so +from my own testimony you can know my office, which is to go before +Christ and prepare the way for him: “There was a man sent by +God, whose name was John” (above 1:6). But the office of +Christ is to judge and to preside. If we look at this closely we +can see that John, like a skilful disputant, answers them with +their own arguments: “I judge you out of your own +mouth,” as said in Luke (19:22).</p> +<p>517 He shows how John is related to his own office when he says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">It is the groom who has the +bride.</span> First, he gives a simile. Secondly, he applies it to +his own situation. With respect to the first he does two things. +First, he gives a simile which applies to Christ; and secondly, to +himself.</p> +<p>518 As to the first, we should note that on the human level it +is the groom who regulates, governs and has the bride. Hence he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">It is the groom who has the +bride.</span> Now the groom is Christ: “Like a bridegroom +coming out of his bridal chamber” (Ps 18:6). His bride is the +Church, which is joined to him by faith: “I will espouse you +to myself in faith” Mos 2:20). In keeping with this figure, +Zipporah said to Moses: “You are a spouse of blood to +me” (Ex 4:25). We read of the marriage: “The marriage +of the Lamb has come” (Rv 19:7). So, because Christ is the +groom, he has the bride, that is, the Church; but my part is only +to rejoice in the fact that he has the bride.</p> +<p>519 Consequently he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The +groom’s friend waits there and listens to him, rejoicing at +hearing his voice.</span> Although John had said earlier that he +was not worthy to unfasten the strap of Jesus’ sandal, he +here calls himself the friend of Jesus in order to bring out the +faithfulness of his love for Christ. For a servant does not act in +the spirit of love in regard to the things that pertain to his +master, but in a spirit of servitude; while a friend, on the other +hand, seeks his friend’s interests out of love and +faithfulness. Hence a faithful servant is like a friend to his +master: “If you have a faithful servant, treat him like +yourself” (Sir 33:31). Indeed, it is proof of a +servant’s faithfulness when he rejoices in the prosperity of +his master, and when he obtains various goods, not for himself, but +for his master. And so because John did not keep the bride +entrusted to his care for himself, but for the groom, we can see +that he was a faithful servant and a friend of the groom. It is to +suggest this that he calls himself <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the groom’s friend.</span></p> +<p>Those who are friends of the truth should act in the same way, +not turning the bride entrusted to their care to their own +advantage and glory, but treating her honorably for the honor and +glory of the groom; otherwise they would not be friends of the +groom but adulterers. This is why Gregory says that a servant who +is sent by the groom with gifts for the bride is guilty of +adulterous thoughts if he himself desires to please the bride. This +is not what the Apostle did: “I espoused you to one husband +in order to present you to Christ as a chaste virgin” (2 Cor +11:2). And John did the same, because he did not keep the bride, +i.e., the faithful, for himself, but brought them to the groom, +that is, to Christ.</p> +<p>520 And so by saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">the +groom’s friend,</span> he suggests the faithfulness of his +love. Further, he suggests his constancy when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">waits,</span> firm in friendship and +faithfulness, not extolling himself above what he really is: +“I will stand my watch” (Hb 2:1); “Be steadfast +and unchanging” (1 Cor 15:58); “A faithful friend, if +he is constant, is like another self” (Sir 6:11).</p> +<p>He suggests his attention when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and listens to him,</span> i.e., attentively +considers the way in which the groom is united to the bride. For +according to Chrysostom, these words explain the manner of this +marriage, for it is accomplished through faith, and “faith +comes through hearing” (Rom 10:17). Or, he <span style= +"font-weight: bold">listens to him,</span> i.e., reverently obeys +him, by caring for the bride according to the commands of the +groom: “I will listen to him as my master,” as is said +in Isaiah (50:4). This is in opposition to those evil prelates who +do not follow Christ’s command in governing the Church.</p> +<p>Likewise, he hints at his spiritual joy when he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">rejoicing at hearing his +voice,</span> that is, when the groom talks to his bride. And he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">rejoicing</span> (literally, +“rejoicing with joy”), to show the truth and perfection +of his joy. For one whose rejoicing is not over the good, does not +rejoice with true joy. And so, if it made me sad that Christ, who +is the true groom, preaches to the bride, i.e., the Church, I would +not be a friend of the groom; but I am not sad.</p> +<p>521 Therefore in this case my joy is complete, namely, in seeing +what I have so long desired, that is, the groom speaking to his +bride. Or, my joy is complete, i.e., brought to its perfect and due +measure, when the bride. is united to the groom, because I now have +my grace and I have completed my work: “I will rejoice in the +Lord, and I will take joy in God, my Jesus” (Hb 3:18).</p> +<p>522 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">He must +increase, and I must decrease,</span> he answers their question as +to their complaint about the increasing esteem given to Christ. +First, he notes that such an increase is fitting. Secondly, he +gives the reason for it (v 31).</p> +<p>523 So he says: You say that all the people are flocking to him, +i.e., to Christ, and therefore that he is growing in honor and +esteem among the people. But I say that this is not unbecoming, +because He must increase, not in himself, but in relation to +others, in the sense that his power becoipe more and more known. +<span style="font-weight: bold">And I must decrease,</span> in the +reverence and esteem of the people: for esteem and reverence are +not due to me as if I were a principal; but they are due to Christ. +And therefore since he has come, the signs of honor are diminishing +in my regard, but increasing in regard to Christ, just as with the +coming of the prince, the office of the ambassador ceases: +“When the perfect comes, what is imperfect will pass +away” (1 Cor 13:10). And just as in the heavens the morning +star appears and gives light before the sun, only to cease giving +light when the sun appears, so John went before Christ and is +compared to the morning star: “Can you bring out the morning +star?” (Jb 38:32).</p> +<p>This is also signified in John’s birth and in his death. +In his birth, because John was born at a time when the days are +getting shorter; Christ, however, was born when the days are +growing longer, on the twenty-fifth of December. In his death, +because John dies shortened by decapitation; but Christ died raised +up by the lifting up of the cross.</p> +<p>524 In the moral sense, this should take place in each one of +us. Christ must increase in you, i.e., you should grow in the +knowledge and love of Christ, because the more you are able to +grasp him by knowledge and love, the more Christ increases in you; +just as the more one improves in seeing one and the same light, the +more that light seems to increase. Consequently, as men advance in +this way, their self-esteem decreases; because the more one knows +of the divine greatness, the less he thinks of his human smallness. +As we read in Proverbs (30:1): “The revelation spoken by the +man close to God”; and then there follows: “I am the +most foolish of men, and the wisdom of men is not in me.” +“I have heard you, but now I see you, and so I reprove +myself, and do penance in dust and ashes,” as we read in Job (42:5).</p> -<p>525 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The One who came from above is above all things, </span>he gives the -reason for what he has just said. And he does this in two ways. First, on the basis of Christ’s -origin. And secondly, by considering Christ’s teaching.</p> -<p>526 Regarding the first, we should note that in order for a thing to be perfect, it must reach -the goal fixed for it by its origin; for example, if one is born from a king, he should continue -to progress until he becomes a king. Now Christ has an origin that is most excellent and -eternal; therefore he must increase by the manifestation of his power, in relation to others, -until it is recognized that he is above all things. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The One who came from -above, </span>that is, Christ, according to his divinity. “No one has gone up to heaven except the -One who came down from heaven” (above 3:13); “You are from below, I am from above” -(below 8:23).</p> -<p>527 Or, he <span style="font-weight: bold">came from above, </span>as to his human nature, i.e., from the “highest” condition of -human nature, by assuming it according to what was predominant in it in each of its states. -For human nature is considered in three states. First, is the state of human nature before sin; -and from this state he took his purity by assuming a flesh unmarked by the stain of original -sin: “A lamb without blemish” (Ex 12:5). The second state is after sin; and from this he took -his capability to suffer and die by assuming the likeness of sinful flesh as regards its -punishment, but not in its guilt: “God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom -8:3). The third state is that of resurrection and glory; and from this he took his impossibility -of sinning and his joy of soul.</p> -<p>528 Here we must be on guard against the error of those who say that there was left in Adam -something materially unmarked by the original stain, and this was passed on to his -descendants; for example, to the Blessed Virgin, and that Christ’s body was formed from this. -This is heretical, because whatever existed in Adam in a material way was marked by the -stain of original sin. Further, the matter from which the body of Christ was formed was -purified by the power of the Holy Spirit when he sanctified the Blessed Virgin.</p> -<p>529 <span style="font-weight: bold">The One who came from above, </span>according to his divinity as well as his human nature, -<span style="font-weight: bold">is above all things, </span>both by eminence of rank: “The Lord is high above all nations” (Ps -112:4), and by his authority and power: “He has made him the head of the Church,” as is said -in Ephesians (1:22).</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p>530 Now he gives the reason for what he had said above (v 30), by considering the teaching -of Christ. First, he describes the doctrine of Christ and its grandeur. Secondly, the difference -in those who receive or reject this doctrine (v 32b). He does two things with respect to the -first. First, he describes John’s doctrine. Secondly, he describes the doctrine of Christ (v 32).</p> -<p>531 As to the first we should note that a man is known mainly by what he says: “Your accent -gives you away” (Mt 26:73); “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Mt -12:34). This is why the quality of a teaching or doctrine is considered according to the quality -of its origin. Accordingly, in order to understand the quality of John’s doctrine, we should -first consider his origin. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">He who is of earth, </span>that is John, not only as to the matter -from. which he was made, but also in his efficient cause: because the body of John was -formed by a created power: “They dwell in houses of clay, and have a foundation of earth” -(Jb 4:19). Secondly, we should consider the quality of John himself, which is earthly; and so -he says, is earthly. Thirdly, the quality of his teaching is described: he <span style="font-weight: bold">speaks of earthly -things. </span>“You will speak of the earth” (Is 29:4).</p> -<p>532 But since John was full of the Holy Spirit while still in his mother’s womb, how can he -be said to speak of earthly things? I answer that, according to Chrysostom, John says he -speaks of earthly things by comparison with the teaching of Christ. As if to say: The things I -speak of are slight and inferior as becomes one of an earthly nature, in comparison to him “in -whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col 2:3); “As the heavens are -high above the earth, so my ways are high above your ways” (Is 55:9).</p> -<p>Or we could say according to Augustine, and this is a better explanation, that we can consider -what any person has of himself and what he has received from another. Now John and every -mere human of himself is of the earth. Therefore, from this standpoint, he has nothing to -speak of except earthly things. And it’ he does speak of divine things, it is due to a divine -enlightenment: “Your heart has visions, but unless they come from the Almighty, ignore -them” (Sir 34:6). So the Apostle says, “It is not 1, but the grace of God which is with me” (1 -Cor 15:10); “For it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit who is speaking through you” -(Mt 10:20). Accordingly, as regards John, he <span style="font-weight: bold">is earthly and speaks of earthly things. </span>And if -there was anything divine in him, it did not come from him, as he was the recipient, but from +<p>525 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The One +who came from above is above all things,</span> he gives the reason +for what he has just said. And he does this in two ways. First, on +the basis of Christ’s origin. And secondly, by considering +Christ’s teaching.</p> +<p>526 Regarding the first, we should note that in order for a +thing to be perfect, it must reach the goal fixed for it by its +origin; for example, if one is born from a king, he should continue +to progress until he becomes a king. Now Christ has an origin that +is most excellent and eternal; therefore he must increase by the +manifestation of his power, in relation to others, until it is +recognized that he is above all things. Thus he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">The One who came from above,</span> that is, +Christ, according to his divinity. “No one has gone up to +heaven except the One who came down from heaven” (above +3:13); “You are from below, I am from above” (below +8:23).</p> +<p>527 Or, he <span style="font-weight: bold">came from +above,</span> as to his human nature, i.e., from the +“highest” condition of human nature, by assuming it +according to what was predominant in it in each of its states. For +human nature is considered in three states. First, is the state of +human nature before sin; and from this state he took his purity by +assuming a flesh unmarked by the stain of original sin: “A +lamb without blemish” (Ex 12:5). The second state is after +sin; and from this he took his capability to suffer and die by +assuming the likeness of sinful flesh as regards its punishment, +but not in its guilt: “God sent his own Son in the likeness +of sinful flesh” (Rom 8:3). The third state is that of +resurrection and glory; and from this he took his impossibility of +sinning and his joy of soul.</p> +<p>528 Here we must be on guard against the error of those who say +that there was left in Adam something materially unmarked by the +original stain, and this was passed on to his descendants; for +example, to the Blessed Virgin, and that Christ’s body was +formed from this. This is heretical, because whatever existed in +Adam in a material way was marked by the stain of original sin. +Further, the matter from which the body of Christ was formed was +purified by the power of the Holy Spirit when he sanctified the +Blessed Virgin.</p> +<p>529 <span style="font-weight: bold">The One who came from +above,</span> according to his divinity as well as his human +nature, <span style="font-weight: bold">is above all things,</span> +both by eminence of rank: “The Lord is high above all +nations” (Ps 112:4), and by his authority and power: +“He has made him the head of the Church,” as is said in +Ephesians (1:22).</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p>530 Now he gives the reason for what he had said above (v 30), +by considering the teaching of Christ. First, he describes the +doctrine of Christ and its grandeur. Secondly, the difference in +those who receive or reject this doctrine (v 32b). He does two +things with respect to the first. First, he describes John’s +doctrine. Secondly, he describes the doctrine of Christ (v 32).</p> +<p>531 As to the first we should note that a man is known mainly by +what he says: “Your accent gives you away” (Mt 26:73); +“Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” +(Mt 12:34). This is why the quality of a teaching or doctrine is +considered according to the quality of its origin. Accordingly, in +order to understand the quality of John’s doctrine, we should +first consider his origin. So he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">He who is of earth,</span> that is John, not +only as to the matter from. which he was made, but also in his +efficient cause: because the body of John was formed by a created +power: “They dwell in houses of clay, and have a foundation +of earth” (Jb 4:19). Secondly, we should consider the quality +of John himself, which is earthly; and so he says, is earthly. +Thirdly, the quality of his teaching is described: he <span style= +"font-weight: bold">speaks of earthly things.</span> “You +will speak of the earth” (Is 29:4).</p> +<p>532 But since John was full of the Holy Spirit while still in +his mother’s womb, how can he be said to speak of earthly +things? I answer that, according to Chrysostom, John says he speaks +of earthly things by comparison with the teaching of Christ. As if +to say: The things I speak of are slight and inferior as becomes +one of an earthly nature, in comparison to him “in whom are +hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col 2:3); +“As the heavens are high above the earth, so my ways are high +above your ways” (Is 55:9).</p> +<p>Or we could say according to Augustine, and this is a better +explanation, that we can consider what any person has of himself +and what he has received from another. Now John and every mere +human of himself is of the earth. Therefore, from this standpoint, +he has nothing to speak of except earthly things. And it’ he +does speak of divine things, it is due to a divine enlightenment: +“Your heart has visions, but unless they come from the +Almighty, ignore them” (Sir 34:6). So the Apostle says, +“It is not 1, but the grace of God which is with me” (1 +Cor 15:10); “For it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit +who is speaking through you” (Mt 10:20). Accordingly, as +regards John, he <span style="font-weight: bold">is earthly and +speaks of earthly things.</span> And if there was anything divine +in him, it did not come from him, as he was the recipient, but from the one enlightening him.</p> -<p>533 Now he describes the doctrine of Christ. And he does three things. First, he shows its -origin, which is heavenly; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The One who comes from heaven is above all -things. </span>For although the body of Christ was of the earth as regards the matter of which it was -made, yet it came from heaven as to its efficient cause, inasmuch as his body was formed by -divine power. It also came from heaven because the eternal and uncreated person of the Son -came from heaven by assuming a body. “No one has gone up to heaven except the One who -came down from heaven, the Son of Man, who lives in heaven” (above 3:13).</p> -<p>Secondly, he shows the dignity of Christ, which is very great; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">is above all things. -</span>This was explained above.</p> -<p>Thirdly, he infers the dignity of Christ’s doctrine, which is most certain, because <span style="font-weight: bold">he testifies -to what he sees and to what he hears. </span>For Christ, as God, is truth itself; but as man, he is its -witness: “For this was I born, and for this I came into the world: to testify to the truth” (below -18:37). Therefore, he gives testimony to himself: “You testify to yourself” (below 8:13). And -he testifies to what is certain, because his testimony is about what he has heard with the -Father: “I speak to the world what I have heard from my Father” (below 8:26); “What we -have seen and heard” (1 Jn 1:3).</p> -<p>534 Note that knowledge of a thing is acquired in through sight and in one way another way -through hearing. For by sight, a knowledge of a thing in acquired by means of the very thing -seen; but by hearing, a thing is not made known by the very voice that is heard, but by means -of the understanding of the one speaking. And so, because the Lord has knowledge which he -has received from the Father, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">to what he sees, </span>insofar as he proceeds from the -essence of the Father; <span style="font-weight: bold">and to what he hears, insofar </span>as he proceeds as the Word of the -Father’s intellect. Now because among intellectual beings, their act of being is other than -their act of understanding, their knowledge through sight is other than their knowledge -through hearing. But in God the Father, the act of being (<i>esse</i>)<i> </i>and the act of understanding -(<i>intelligere</i>) are the same. Thus in the Son, to see and hear are the same thing. Moreover, -since even in one who sees there is not the essence of the thing seen in itself but only its -similitude, as also in the hearer there is not the actual thought of the speaker but only an -indication of it, so the one who sees is not the essence of the thing in itself, nor is the listener -the very thought expressed. In the Son, however, the very essence of the Father is received by -generation, and he himself is the Word; and so in him to see and to hear are the same.</p> -<p>And so John concludes that since the doctrine of Christ has more grandeur and is more certain -than his, one must listen to Christ rather than to him.</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 6</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p style="margin-left: 0.5in">32b “And his testimony no one accepts. -<br>33 But whoever accepts his testimony -<br>has given a sign [or certifies] that God is true. -<br>34 For the One whom God sends -<br>speaks the words of God, -<br>for God does not bestow the Spirit in fractions. -<br>35 The Father loves the Son, -<br>and has put everything into his hands. -<br>36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. -<br>But whoever is unbelieving in the Son -<br>will not see life; -<BR>rather, the anger of God rests on him.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>535 Above, John the Baptist commended the teaching of Christ; here, however, he considers -the difference in those who receive it. Thus, he treats of the faith that must be given to this -teaching. And he does three things. First, he shows the scarcity of those who believe. -Secondly, the obligation to believe (v 33). Lastly, the reward for belief (v 36).</p> -<p>536 He says therefore: I say that Christ has certain knowledge and that he speaks the truth. -Yet although few accept his testimony, that is no reflection on his teaching, because it is not -the fault of the teaching but of those who do not accept it: namely, the disciples of John, who -did not yet believe, and the Pharisees, who slandered his teaching. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">And his -testimony no one accepts.</span></p> -<p>537 <span style="font-weight: bold">No one</span> can be explained in two ways. First, so that it implies a few; and so some did -accept his testimony. He shows that some did accept it when he adds, “But whoever accepts -his testimony.” The Evangelist used this way of speaking before when he said: “He came unto -his own, and his own did not receive him” (above 1:11): because a few did receive him.</p> -<p>In another way, to accept his testimony is understood as to believe in God. But no one can -believe of himself, but only due to God: “You are saved by grace” (Eph 2:8). And so he says, -his testimony no one accepts, i.e., of himself, but it is given to him by God.</p> -<p>This can be explained in another way by realizing that Scripture refers to people in two ways. -As long as we are in this world the wicked are mingled with the good; and so Scripture -sometimes speaks of “the people,” or “they,” meaning those who are good; while at other -times, the same words can refer to the wicked. We can see this in Jeremiah (26): for first it -says that all the people and the priests sought to kill Jeremiah, and this referred to those who -were evil; then at once it says that all the people sought to free him, and this referred to those -who were good. In the same way, John the Baptist says, looking to the left, i.e., toward those -who are evil, <span style="font-weight: bold">And his testimony no one accepts; </span>and later, referring to those on the right, -i.e., to the good, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But whoever accepts his testimony.</span></p> -<p>538 <span style="font-weight: bold">But whoever accepts his testimony. </span>Here he speaks of the obligation to believe, i.e., to -submit oneself to divine truth. As to this he does four things. First, he presents the divine -truth. Secondly, he speaks of the proclamation of the divine truth (v 34). Thirdly, of the -ability to proclaim it ( v 34b). Fourthly, he gives the reason for this ability (v 35).</p> -<p>539 Man’s obligation to the faith is to submit himself to divine truth, and so he says that if -few accept his testimony that means that some do. Hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever accepts his -testimony, </span>i.e., whoever he may be, <span style="font-weight: bold">has given a sign, </span>i.e., he ought to affix a certain sign or -has in fact placed a seal in his own heart, that Christ is God. And he [Christ] is true, because -he said that he is God. If he were not, he would not be true, but it is written: “God is true” -(Rom 3:4). Concerning this seal it is said: “Set me as a seal on your heart” (Sg 8:6), and “The -foundation of God stands firm, bearing a seal, etc.” as we read in 2 Timothy (2:19).</p> -<p>Or, following Chrysostom, he has given a sign, i.e., he has shown <span style="font-weight: bold">that God, </span>that is, the -Father, <span style="font-weight: bold">is true, </span>because he sent his Son whom he promised to send. The Fvangelist says this -to show that those who do not believe Christ deny the truthfulness of the Father.</p> -<p>540 Then immediately he adds a commendation of divine truth, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">For the One whom -God sends speaks the words of God. </span>As if to say: He has given this as a sign, namely, that -Christ, whose testimony he accepts, <span style="font-weight: bold">the One whom God sends speaks the words of God. -</span>Consequently, one who believes Christ believes the Father: “I speak to the world what I have -heard from the Father” (below 8:26). So he expressed verbally nothing but the Father and the -words of the Father, because he has been sent by the Father, and because he is the Word of -the Father. Hence, he says that he even bespeaks the Father.</p> -<p>Or, if the statement <span style="font-weight: bold">God is true </span>refers to Christ, we understand the distinction of persons; for -since the Father is true God, and Christ is true God, it follows that the true God sent the true -God, who is distinct from him in person, but not in nature.</p> -<p>541 The ability to proclaim divine truth is present in Christ in the highest degree, because he -does not receive the Spirit in a partial way; and so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">for God does not bestow the -Spirit in fractions.</span></p> -<p>You might say that although God sent Christ, yet not all that Christ says is from God, but only -some of the things; for even the prophets spoke at times from their own spirit, and at other -times from the Spirit of God. For example, we read that the prophet Nathan (2 Sm 7:3), -speaking out of his own spirit, advised David to build a temple, but that later, under the -influence of the Spirit of God, he retracted this. However, the Baptist shows that such is not -the case with Christ. For the prophets receive the Spirit of God only fractionally, i.e., in -reference to some things, but not as to all things. Consequently, not all they say are the words -of God. But Christ, who received the Spirit fully and in regards to all things, speaks the words -of God as to all things.</p> -<p>542 But how can the Holy Spirit be given in fractions, since he is immense or infinite, -according to the Creed of Athanasius: “Immense is the Father, immense the Son, immense the -Holy Spirit”? I answer that the Holy Spirit is given in fractions, not in respect to his essence -or power, according to which he is infinite, but as to his gifts, which are given fractionally: -“Grace has been given to each of us according to degree” (Eph 4:7).</p> -<p>543 We should note that we can understand in two ways what is said here, namely, that God -the Father did not give the Spirit to Christ in a partial way. We can understand it as applying -to Christ as God, and, in another way, as applying to Christ as man. Something is given to -someone in order that he may have it: and it is appropriate to Christ to have the Spirit, both as -God and as man. And so he has the Holy Spirit with respect to both. As man, Christ has the -Holy Spirit as Sanctifier: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because the Lord has anointed -me” (Is 6 1:1), namely, as man. But as God, he has the Holy Spirit only as manifesting -himself, inasmuch as the Spirit proceeds from him: “He will give glory to me,” that is, make -known, “because he will have received from me,” as is said below (16:14).</p> -<p>Therefore, both as God and as man, Christ has the Holy Spirit beyond measure. For God the -Father is said to give the Holy Spirit without measure to Christ as God, because he gives to -Christ the power and might to bring forth (<i>spirandi</i>)<i> </i>the Holy Spirit, who, since he is infinite, -was infinitely given to him by the Father: for the Father gives it just as he himself has it, so -that the Holy Spirit proceeds from him as much as from the Son. And he gave him this by an -everlasting generation. Similarly, Christ as man has the Holy Spirit without measure, for the -Holy Spirit is given to different men in differing degrees, because grace is given to each “by -measure” [cf., e.g., Mk 4:24; Mt 7:2]. But Christ as man did not receive a certain amount of -grace; and so he did not receive the Holy Spirit in any limited degree.</p> -<p>544 It should be noted, however, that there are three kinds of grace in Christ: the grace of [the -hypostatic] union, the grace of a singular person, which is habitual, and the grace of headship, -which animates all the members. And Christ received each of these graces without measure.</p> -<p>The grace of union, which is not habitual grace, but a certain gratuitous gift, is given to Christ -in order that in his human nature he be the true Son of God, not by participation, but by -nature, insofar as the human nature of Christ is united to the Son of God in person. This union -is called a grace because he had it without any preceding merits. Now the divine nature is -infinite; hence from that union he received an infinite gift. Thus it was not by degree or -measure that he received the Holy Spirit, i.e., the gift and grace of union which, as gratuitous, -is attributed to the Holy Spirit.</p> -<p>His grace is termed habitual insofar as the soul of Christ was full of grace and wisdom: “the -Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (above 1:14). We might wonder if Christ -did receive this grace without measure. For since such grace is a created gift, we must admit -that it has a finite essence. Therefore, as far as its essence is concerned, since it is something -created, this habitual grace was finite. Yet Christ is not said to have received this in a limited -degree for three reasons.</p> -<p>First, becatise of the one who is receiving the grace. For it is plain that each thing’s nature has -a finite capacity, because even though one might receive an infinite good by knowing, loving -and enjoying it, nevertheless one receives it by enjoying it in a finite way. Further, each -creature has, according to its species and nature, a finite amount of capacity. But this does not -make it impossible for the divine power to make another creature possessing a greater -capacity; but then such a creature would not be of a nature which is specifically the same, just -as when one is added to three, there is another species of number. Therefore, when some -nature is not given as much of the divine goodness as its natural capacity is able to contain, -then it is seen to be given to it by measure; but when its total natural capacity is filled, it is not -given to it by measure, because even though there is a measure on the part of the one -receiving, there is none on the part of the one giving, who is prepared to give all. Thus, if -someone takes a pail to a river, he sees water present without measure, although he takes the -water by measure on account of the limited dimensions of the pail. Thus, the habitual grace of -Christ is indeed finite according to its essence, but it is said to be given in an infinite way and -not by measure or partially, because as much was given to him as created nature was able to -hold.</p> -<p>Secondly, Christ did not receive habitual grace in a limited way by considering the gift which -is received. For every form or act, considered in its very nature, is not finite in the way in -which it is made finite by the subject in which it is received. Nevertheless, there is nothing to -prevent it from being finite in its essence, insofar as its existence (<i>esse</i>) is<i> </i>received in some -subject. For that is infinite according to its essence which has the entire fulness of being -(<i>essendi</i>): and this is true of God alone, who is the supreme <i>esse. </i>But if we consider some -“spiritual” form as not existing in a subject, for example, whiteness or color, it would not be -infinite in essence, because its essence would be confined to some genus or species; -nevertheless it would still possess the entire fulness of that species. Thus, considering the -nature of the species, it would be without limit or measure, since it would have everything -that can pertain to that species. But if whiteness or color should be received into some -subject, it does not always have everything that pertains necessarily and always to the nature -of this form, but only when the subject has it as perfectly as it is capable of being possessed, -i.e., when the way the subject possesses it is equivalent to the power of the thing possessed. -Thus, Christ’s habitual grace was finite according to its essence; yet it is said to have been in -him without a limit or measure because he received everything that could pertain to the nature -of grace. Others, however, do not receive all this, but one receives in one way, and another in -another way: “There are different graces”</p> -<p>The third reason for saying that the habitual grace of Christ was not received in a limited way -is based on its cause. For an effect is in some way present in its cause. Therefore, if someone -has an infinite power to produce something, he is said to have what can be produced without -measure and, in a way, infinitely. For example, if someone has a fountain which could -produce an infinite amount of water, he would be said to have water in an infinite way and -without measure. Thus, the soul of Christ has infinite grace and grace without measure from -the fact that he has united to himself the Word, which is the infinite and unfailing source of -the entire emanation of all created things.</p> -<p>From what has been said, it is clear that the grace of Christ which is called capital grace, -insofar as he is head of the Church, is infinite in its influence. For from the fact that he -possessed that from which the gifts of the Spirit could flow out without measure, he received -the power to pour them out without measure, so that the grace of Christ is sufficient not -merely for the salvation of some men, but for all the people of the entire world: “He is the -offering for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the entire world” ( 1 Jn 2:2), -and even for many worlds, if they exsited.</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p>545 Christ also had the ability appropriate for declaring divine truth, because all things are in -his power; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Father loves the Son, and has put everything into his -hands. </span>This can refer to Christ both as man and as God, but in different ways. If it refers to -Christ according to his divine nature, then <span style="font-weight: bold">loves </span>does not indicate a principle but a sign: for -we cannot say that the Father gives all things to the Son because he loves him. There are two -reasons for this. First, because to love is an act of the will; but to give a nature to the Son is to -generate him. Therefore, if the Father gave a nature to the Son by his will, the will of the -Father would be the principle of the generation of the Son; and then it would follow that the -Father generated the Son by will, and not by nature; and this is the Arian heresy.</p> -<p>Secondly, because the love of the Father for the Son is the Holy Spirit. So, if the love of the -Father for the Son were the reason why the Father put everything into his hands, it would -follow that the Holy Spirit would be the principle of the generation of the Son; and this is not -acceptable. Therefore, we should say that <span style="font-weight: bold">loves </span>implies only a sign. As if to say: The perfect -love with which <span style="font-weight: bold">the Father loves the Son, </span>is a sign that the Father <span style="font-weight: bold">has put everything into -his hands, </span>i.e., everything which the Father has: “All things have been given to me by my -Father- (Mt 11:27); “Jesus, knowing that the Fallier had given all things into his hands” -(below 13:3).</p> -<p>But if loves refers to Christ as man, then it implies the notion of a principle, so that the Father -is said to have put everything into the hands of the Son, everything, that is, that is in heaven -and on earth: “All authority has been given to me, in heaven and on earth,” as he says in -Matthew (28:18); “He has appointed him [the Son] the heir of all things” (Heb 1:2). And the -reason why the Father gives to the Son is because he loves the Son; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The -Father loves the Son, </span>for the Father’s love is the reason for creating each creature: “You love -everything which exists, and hate nothing which you have made” (Wis 11:25). Concerning -his love for the Son we read in Matthew (3:17): “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well -pleased”; “He has brought us into the kingdom of the Son of his love,” that is, i.e., of his -beloved Son (Col 1:13).</p> -<p>546 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, </span>he shows the fruit of -faith. First, he sets forth the reward for faith. Secondly, the penalty for unbelief (v 36b).</p> -<p>547 The reward for faith is beyond our comprehension, because it is eternal life. Hence he -says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. </span>And this is shown from what has already -been said. For if the Father has given everything he has to the Son, and the Father has eternal -life, then he has given to the Son to be eternal life: “Just as the Father possesses life in -himself, so he has given it to the Son to have life in himself” (below 5:26): and this belongs -to Christ insofar as he is the true and natural Son of God. “That you may be in his true Son, -Christ. This is the true God and eternal life” (1 Jn 5:20). <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in the Son </span>has -that toward which he tends, that is, the Son, in whom he believes. But the Son is eternal life; -therefore, whoever believes in him has eternal life. As it says below (10:27): “My sheep hear -my voice ... and I give them eternal life.”</p> -<p>548 The penalty for unbelief is unendurable, both as to the punishment of loss and as to the -punishment of sense. As to the punishment of loss, because it deprives one of life; hence he -says, <span style="font-weight: bold">whoever is unbelieving in the Son will not see life. </span>He does not say, “will not have,” -but will not see, because eternal life consists in the vision of the true life: “This is eternal life: -that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (below -17:3): and unbelievers will not have this vision and this knowledge: “Let him not see the -brooks of honey” (Jb 4:19), that is, the sweetness of eternal life. And he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">will not see, -</span>because to see life itself is the proper reward for faith united with love.</p> -<p>The punishment of sense is unendurable because one is severely punished; so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">the -anger of God rests on him. </span>For in the Scriptures anger indicates the pain with which God -punishes those who are evil. So when he says, the anger of God, the Father, rests on him, it is -the same as saying: They will feel punishment from God the Father.</p> -<p>Although the Father “has given all judgment to the Son,” as we read below (5:22), the Baptist -refers this to the Father in order to lead the Jews to believe in the Son. It is written about this -judgment: “It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31). He says, -<span style="font-weight: bold">rests on him</span>, because this punishment will never be absent from the unbelieving, and -because all who are born into this mortal life are the objects of God’s anger, which was first -felt by Adam: “We were by nature,” that is, through birth, “children of anger” (Eph 2:3). And -we are freed from this anger only by faith in Christ; and so the anger of God rests on those -who do not believe in Christ, the Son of God.</p> +<p>533 Now he describes the doctrine of Christ. And he does three +things. First, he shows its origin, which is heavenly; hence he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The One who comes from heaven +is above all things.</span> For although the body of Christ was of +the earth as regards the matter of which it was made, yet it came +from heaven as to its efficient cause, inasmuch as his body was +formed by divine power. It also came from heaven because the +eternal and uncreated person of the Son came from heaven by +assuming a body. “No one has gone up to heaven except the One +who came down from heaven, the Son of Man, who lives in +heaven” (above 3:13).</p> +<p>Secondly, he shows the dignity of Christ, which is very great; +so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">is above all +things.</span> This was explained above.</p> +<p>Thirdly, he infers the dignity of Christ’s doctrine, which +is most certain, because <span style="font-weight: bold">he +testifies to what he sees and to what he hears.</span> For Christ, +as God, is truth itself; but as man, he is its witness: “For +this was I born, and for this I came into the world: to testify to +the truth” (below 18:37). Therefore, he gives testimony to +himself: “You testify to yourself” (below 8:13). And he +testifies to what is certain, because his testimony is about what +he has heard with the Father: “I speak to the world what I +have heard from my Father” (below 8:26); “What we have +seen and heard” (1 Jn 1:3).</p> +<p>534 Note that knowledge of a thing is acquired in through sight +and in one way another way through hearing. For by sight, a +knowledge of a thing in acquired by means of the very thing seen; +but by hearing, a thing is not made known by the very voice that is +heard, but by means of the understanding of the one speaking. And +so, because the Lord has knowledge which he has received from the +Father, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">to what he +sees,</span> insofar as he proceeds from the essence of the Father; +<span style="font-weight: bold">and to what he hears, +insofar</span> as he proceeds as the Word of the Father’s +intellect. Now because among intellectual beings, their act of +being is other than their act of understanding, their knowledge +through sight is other than their knowledge through hearing. But in +God the Father, the act of being (<i>esse</i>) and the act of +understanding (<i>intelligere</i>) are the same. Thus in the Son, +to see and hear are the same thing. Moreover, since even in one who +sees there is not the essence of the thing seen in itself but only +its similitude, as also in the hearer there is not the actual +thought of the speaker but only an indication of it, so the one who +sees is not the essence of the thing in itself, nor is the listener +the very thought expressed. In the Son, however, the very essence +of the Father is received by generation, and he himself is the +Word; and so in him to see and to hear are the same.</p> +<p>And so John concludes that since the doctrine of Christ has more +grandeur and is more certain than his, one must listen to Christ +rather than to him.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 6</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">32b “And his testimony no one +accepts.<br /> +33 But whoever accepts his testimony<br /> +has given a sign [or certifies] that God is true.<br /> +34 For the One whom God sends<br /> +speaks the words of God,<br /> +for God does not bestow the Spirit in fractions.<br /> +35 The Father loves the Son,<br /> +and has put everything into his hands.<br /> +36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life.<br /> +But whoever is unbelieving in the Son<br /> +will not see life;<br /> +rather, the anger of God rests on him.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>535 Above, John the Baptist commended the teaching of Christ; +here, however, he considers the difference in those who receive it. +Thus, he treats of the faith that must be given to this teaching. +And he does three things. First, he shows the scarcity of those who +believe. Secondly, the obligation to believe (v 33). Lastly, the +reward for belief (v 36).</p> +<p>536 He says therefore: I say that Christ has certain knowledge +and that he speaks the truth. Yet although few accept his +testimony, that is no reflection on his teaching, because it is not +the fault of the teaching but of those who do not accept it: +namely, the disciples of John, who did not yet believe, and the +Pharisees, who slandered his teaching. Thus he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">And his testimony no one accepts.</span></p> +<p>537 <span style="font-weight: bold">No one</span> can be +explained in two ways. First, so that it implies a few; and so some +did accept his testimony. He shows that some did accept it when he +adds, “But whoever accepts his testimony.” The +Evangelist used this way of speaking before when he said: “He +came unto his own, and his own did not receive him” (above +1:11): because a few did receive him.</p> +<p>In another way, to accept his testimony is understood as to +believe in God. But no one can believe of himself, but only due to +God: “You are saved by grace” (Eph 2:8). And so he +says, his testimony no one accepts, i.e., of himself, but it is +given to him by God.</p> +<p>This can be explained in another way by realizing that Scripture +refers to people in two ways. As long as we are in this world the +wicked are mingled with the good; and so Scripture sometimes speaks +of “the people,” or “they,” meaning those +who are good; while at other times, the same words can refer to the +wicked. We can see this in Jeremiah (26): for first it says that +all the people and the priests sought to kill Jeremiah, and this +referred to those who were evil; then at once it says that all the +people sought to free him, and this referred to those who were +good. In the same way, John the Baptist says, looking to the left, +i.e., toward those who are evil, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">And his testimony no one accepts;</span> and +later, referring to those on the right, i.e., to the good, he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">But whoever accepts his +testimony.</span></p> +<p>538 <span style="font-weight: bold">But whoever accepts his +testimony.</span> Here he speaks of the obligation to believe, +i.e., to submit oneself to divine truth. As to this he does four +things. First, he presents the divine truth. Secondly, he speaks of +the proclamation of the divine truth (v 34). Thirdly, of the +ability to proclaim it ( v 34b). Fourthly, he gives the reason for +this ability (v 35).</p> +<p>539 Man’s obligation to the faith is to submit himself to +divine truth, and so he says that if few accept his testimony that +means that some do. Hence he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">whoever accepts his testimony,</span> i.e., +whoever he may be, <span style="font-weight: bold">has given a +sign,</span> i.e., he ought to affix a certain sign or has in fact +placed a seal in his own heart, that Christ is God. And he [Christ] +is true, because he said that he is God. If he were not, he would +not be true, but it is written: “God is true” (Rom +3:4). Concerning this seal it is said: “Set me as a seal on +your heart” (Sg 8:6), and “The foundation of God stands +firm, bearing a seal, etc.” as we read in 2 Timothy +(2:19).</p> +<p>Or, following Chrysostom, he has given a sign, i.e., he has +shown <span style="font-weight: bold">that God,</span> that is, the +Father, <span style="font-weight: bold">is true,</span> because he +sent his Son whom he promised to send. The Fvangelist says this to +show that those who do not believe Christ deny the truthfulness of +the Father.</p> +<p>540 Then immediately he adds a commendation of divine truth, +saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">For the One whom God sends +speaks the words of God.</span> As if to say: He has given this as +a sign, namely, that Christ, whose testimony he accepts, +<span style="font-weight: bold">the One whom God sends speaks the +words of God.</span> Consequently, one who believes Christ believes +the Father: “I speak to the world what I have heard from the +Father” (below 8:26). So he expressed verbally nothing but +the Father and the words of the Father, because he has been sent by +the Father, and because he is the Word of the Father. Hence, he +says that he even bespeaks the Father.</p> +<p>Or, if the statement <span style="font-weight: bold">God is +true</span> refers to Christ, we understand the distinction of +persons; for since the Father is true God, and Christ is true God, +it follows that the true God sent the true God, who is distinct +from him in person, but not in nature.</p> +<p>541 The ability to proclaim divine truth is present in Christ in +the highest degree, because he does not receive the Spirit in a +partial way; and so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">for +God does not bestow the Spirit in fractions.</span></p> +<p>You might say that although God sent Christ, yet not all that +Christ says is from God, but only some of the things; for even the +prophets spoke at times from their own spirit, and at other times +from the Spirit of God. For example, we read that the prophet +Nathan (2 Sm 7:3), speaking out of his own spirit, advised David to +build a temple, but that later, under the influence of the Spirit +of God, he retracted this. However, the Baptist shows that such is +not the case with Christ. For the prophets receive the Spirit of +God only fractionally, i.e., in reference to some things, but not +as to all things. Consequently, not all they say are the words of +God. But Christ, who received the Spirit fully and in regards to +all things, speaks the words of God as to all things.</p> +<p>542 But how can the Holy Spirit be given in fractions, since he +is immense or infinite, according to the Creed of Athanasius: +“Immense is the Father, immense the Son, immense the Holy +Spirit”? I answer that the Holy Spirit is given in fractions, +not in respect to his essence or power, according to which he is +infinite, but as to his gifts, which are given fractionally: +“Grace has been given to each of us according to +degree” (Eph 4:7).</p> +<p>543 We should note that we can understand in two ways what is +said here, namely, that God the Father did not give the Spirit to +Christ in a partial way. We can understand it as applying to Christ +as God, and, in another way, as applying to Christ as man. +Something is given to someone in order that he may have it: and it +is appropriate to Christ to have the Spirit, both as God and as +man. And so he has the Holy Spirit with respect to both. As man, +Christ has the Holy Spirit as Sanctifier: “The Spirit of the +Lord is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me” (Is 6 +1:1), namely, as man. But as God, he has the Holy Spirit only as +manifesting himself, inasmuch as the Spirit proceeds from him: +“He will give glory to me,” that is, make known, +“because he will have received from me,” as is said +below (16:14).</p> +<p>Therefore, both as God and as man, Christ has the Holy Spirit +beyond measure. For God the Father is said to give the Holy Spirit +without measure to Christ as God, because he gives to Christ the +power and might to bring forth (<i>spirandi</i>) the Holy Spirit, +who, since he is infinite, was infinitely given to him by the +Father: for the Father gives it just as he himself has it, so that +the Holy Spirit proceeds from him as much as from the Son. And he +gave him this by an everlasting generation. Similarly, Christ as +man has the Holy Spirit without measure, for the Holy Spirit is +given to different men in differing degrees, because grace is given +to each “by measure” [cf., e.g., Mk 4:24; Mt 7:2]. But +Christ as man did not receive a certain amount of grace; and so he +did not receive the Holy Spirit in any limited degree.</p> +<p>544 It should be noted, however, that there are three kinds of +grace in Christ: the grace of [the hypostatic] union, the grace of +a singular person, which is habitual, and the grace of headship, +which animates all the members. And Christ received each of these +graces without measure.</p> +<p>The grace of union, which is not habitual grace, but a certain +gratuitous gift, is given to Christ in order that in his human +nature he be the true Son of God, not by participation, but by +nature, insofar as the human nature of Christ is united to the Son +of God in person. This union is called a grace because he had it +without any preceding merits. Now the divine nature is infinite; +hence from that union he received an infinite gift. Thus it was not +by degree or measure that he received the Holy Spirit, i.e., the +gift and grace of union which, as gratuitous, is attributed to the +Holy Spirit.</p> +<p>His grace is termed habitual insofar as the soul of Christ was +full of grace and wisdom: “the Only Begotten of the Father, +full of grace and truth” (above 1:14). We might wonder if +Christ did receive this grace without measure. For since such grace +is a created gift, we must admit that it has a finite essence. +Therefore, as far as its essence is concerned, since it is +something created, this habitual grace was finite. Yet Christ is +not said to have received this in a limited degree for three +reasons.</p> +<p>First, becatise of the one who is receiving the grace. For it is +plain that each thing’s nature has a finite capacity, because +even though one might receive an infinite good by knowing, loving +and enjoying it, nevertheless one receives it by enjoying it in a +finite way. Further, each creature has, according to its species +and nature, a finite amount of capacity. But this does not make it +impossible for the divine power to make another creature possessing +a greater capacity; but then such a creature would not be of a +nature which is specifically the same, just as when one is added to +three, there is another species of number. Therefore, when some +nature is not given as much of the divine goodness as its natural +capacity is able to contain, then it is seen to be given to it by +measure; but when its total natural capacity is filled, it is not +given to it by measure, because even though there is a measure on +the part of the one receiving, there is none on the part of the one +giving, who is prepared to give all. Thus, if someone takes a pail +to a river, he sees water present without measure, although he +takes the water by measure on account of the limited dimensions of +the pail. Thus, the habitual grace of Christ is indeed finite +according to its essence, but it is said to be given in an infinite +way and not by measure or partially, because as much was given to +him as created nature was able to hold.</p> +<p>Secondly, Christ did not receive habitual grace in a limited way +by considering the gift which is received. For every form or act, +considered in its very nature, is not finite in the way in which it +is made finite by the subject in which it is received. +Nevertheless, there is nothing to prevent it from being finite in +its essence, insofar as its existence (<i>esse</i>) is received in +some subject. For that is infinite according to its essence which +has the entire fulness of being (<i>essendi</i>): and this is true +of God alone, who is the supreme <i>esse.</i> But if we consider +some “spiritual” form as not existing in a subject, for +example, whiteness or color, it would not be infinite in essence, +because its essence would be confined to some genus or species; +nevertheless it would still possess the entire fulness of that +species. Thus, considering the nature of the species, it would be +without limit or measure, since it would have everything that can +pertain to that species. But if whiteness or color should be +received into some subject, it does not always have everything that +pertains necessarily and always to the nature of this form, but +only when the subject has it as perfectly as it is capable of being +possessed, i.e., when the way the subject possesses it is +equivalent to the power of the thing possessed. Thus, +Christ’s habitual grace was finite according to its essence; +yet it is said to have been in him without a limit or measure +because he received everything that could pertain to the nature of +grace. Others, however, do not receive all this, but one receives +in one way, and another in another way: “There are different +graces”</p> +<p>The third reason for saying that the habitual grace of Christ +was not received in a limited way is based on its cause. For an +effect is in some way present in its cause. Therefore, if someone +has an infinite power to produce something, he is said to have what +can be produced without measure and, in a way, infinitely. For +example, if someone has a fountain which could produce an infinite +amount of water, he would be said to have water in an infinite way +and without measure. Thus, the soul of Christ has infinite grace +and grace without measure from the fact that he has united to +himself the Word, which is the infinite and unfailing source of the +entire emanation of all created things.</p> +<p>From what has been said, it is clear that the grace of Christ +which is called capital grace, insofar as he is head of the Church, +is infinite in its influence. For from the fact that he possessed +that from which the gifts of the Spirit could flow out without +measure, he received the power to pour them out without measure, so +that the grace of Christ is sufficient not merely for the salvation +of some men, but for all the people of the entire world: “He +is the offering for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for +those of the entire world” ( 1 Jn 2:2), and even for many +worlds, if they exsited.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p>545 Christ also had the ability appropriate for declaring divine +truth, because all things are in his power; hence he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">The Father loves the Son, and has +put everything into his hands.</span> This can refer to Christ both +as man and as God, but in different ways. If it refers to Christ +according to his divine nature, then <span style= +"font-weight: bold">loves</span> does not indicate a principle but +a sign: for we cannot say that the Father gives all things to the +Son because he loves him. There are two reasons for this. First, +because to love is an act of the will; but to give a nature to the +Son is to generate him. Therefore, if the Father gave a nature to +the Son by his will, the will of the Father would be the principle +of the generation of the Son; and then it would follow that the +Father generated the Son by will, and not by nature; and this is +the Arian heresy.</p> +<p>Secondly, because the love of the Father for the Son is the Holy +Spirit. So, if the love of the Father for the Son were the reason +why the Father put everything into his hands, it would follow that +the Holy Spirit would be the principle of the generation of the +Son; and this is not acceptable. Therefore, we should say that +<span style="font-weight: bold">loves</span> implies only a sign. +As if to say: The perfect love with which <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Father loves the Son,</span> is a sign that +the Father <span style="font-weight: bold">has put everything into +his hands,</span> i.e., everything which the Father has: “All +things have been given to me by my Father- (Mt 11:27); +“Jesus, knowing that the Fallier had given all things into +his hands” (below 13:3).</p> +<p>But if loves refers to Christ as man, then it implies the notion +of a principle, so that the Father is said to have put everything +into the hands of the Son, everything, that is, that is in heaven +and on earth: “All authority has been given to me, in heaven +and on earth,” as he says in Matthew (28:18); “He has +appointed him [the Son] the heir of all things” (Heb 1:2). +And the reason why the Father gives to the Son is because he loves +the Son; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Father +loves the Son,</span> for the Father’s love is the reason for +creating each creature: “You love everything which exists, +and hate nothing which you have made” (Wis 11:25). Concerning +his love for the Son we read in Matthew (3:17): “This is my +beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”; “He has +brought us into the kingdom of the Son of his love,” that is, +i.e., of his beloved Son (Col 1:13).</p> +<p>546 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever +believes in the Son has eternal life,</span> he shows the fruit of +faith. First, he sets forth the reward for faith. Secondly, the +penalty for unbelief (v 36b).</p> +<p>547 The reward for faith is beyond our comprehension, because it +is eternal life. Hence he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in the Son has eternal +life.</span> And this is shown from what has already been said. For +if the Father has given everything he has to the Son, and the +Father has eternal life, then he has given to the Son to be eternal +life: “Just as the Father possesses life in himself, so he +has given it to the Son to have life in himself” (below +5:26): and this belongs to Christ insofar as he is the true and +natural Son of God. “That you may be in his true Son, Christ. +This is the true God and eternal life” (1 Jn 5:20). +<span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in the Son</span> +has that toward which he tends, that is, the Son, in whom he +believes. But the Son is eternal life; therefore, whoever believes +in him has eternal life. As it says below (10:27): “My sheep +hear my voice ... and I give them eternal life.”</p> +<p>548 The penalty for unbelief is unendurable, both as to the +punishment of loss and as to the punishment of sense. As to the +punishment of loss, because it deprives one of life; hence he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">whoever is unbelieving in the Son +will not see life.</span> He does not say, “will not +have,” but will not see, because eternal life consists in the +vision of the true life: “This is eternal life: that they may +know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have +sent” (below 17:3): and unbelievers will not have this vision +and this knowledge: “Let him not see the brooks of +honey” (Jb 4:19), that is, the sweetness of eternal life. And +he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">will not see,</span> +because to see life itself is the proper reward for faith united +with love.</p> +<p>The punishment of sense is unendurable because one is severely +punished; so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">the anger of +God rests on him.</span> For in the Scriptures anger indicates the +pain with which God punishes those who are evil. So when he says, +the anger of God, the Father, rests on him, it is the same as +saying: They will feel punishment from God the Father.</p> +<p>Although the Father “has given all judgment to the +Son,” as we read below (5:22), the Baptist refers this to the +Father in order to lead the Jews to believe in the Son. It is +written about this judgment: “It is a terrible thing to fall +into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31). He says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">rests on him</span>, because this +punishment will never be absent from the unbelieving, and because +all who are born into this mortal life are the objects of +God’s anger, which was first felt by Adam: “We were by +nature,” that is, through birth, “children of +anger” (Eph 2:3). And we are freed from this anger only by +faith in Christ; and so the anger of God rests on those who do not +believe in Christ, the Son of God.</p> +</blockquote> </body> - </html>