Mercurial > hg > Aquinas
diff john/english/John5.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/John5.html Mon Nov 30 21:59:53 2009 +0000 +++ b/john/english/John5.html Mon Nov 30 22:05:42 2009 +0000 @@ -1,1688 +1,2698 @@ -<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> -<CENTER><p><span style="font-size: 60pt">5</span></p> -<p><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 1</span></p></CENTER> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p>1 After this there was a Jewish festival, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 2 Now at Jerusalem -there is a Sheep Pool, called in Hebrew Bethsaida, having five porticoes. 3 In these porticoes lay -a great number of people: feeble, blind, lame and withered, waiting for the movement of the -water. 4 From time to time an angel of the Lord used to come down into the pool and the water -was stirred up, and the first one into the pool after it was stirred was healed of whatever ailment -he had. 5 There was one man lying there who had been sick for thirty-eight years with his -infirmity. 6 Jesus, seeing him lying there and knowing that he had been sick a long time, said to -him, “Do you wish to be healed?” 7 The sick man said, “Sir, I have no one to plunge me into the -pool once the water is stirred up. By the time I get there, someone else has gone in before me.” -8 Jesus said to him, “Stand up, pick up your mat and walk!” 9a The man was immediately cured; -he picked up his mat, and walked.</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>699 Above, our Lord dealt with spiritual rebirth; here he deals with the benefits God gives to -those who are spiritually reborn. Now we see that parents give three things to those who are -physically born from them: life, nourishment, and instruction or discipline. And those who are -spiritually reborn receive these three from Christ: spiritual life, spiritual nourishment, and -spiritual teaching. And so these three things are considered here: first, the giving of spiritual life; -secondly, the giving of spiritual food (c 6); and thirdly, spiritual teaching (c 7).</p> -<p>About the first he does three things. First, he sets forth a visible sign in which he shows Christ’s -power to produce and to restore life. This is the usual practice in this Gospel: to always join to -the teaching of Christ some appropriate visible action, so that what is invisible can be made -known through the visible. Secondly, the occasion for this teaching is given (v 9b). Thirdly, the -teaching itself is given (v 19). As to the first he does three things. First, the place of the miracle -is given. Secondly, the illness involved. Thirdly, the restoration of the sick person to health (v -8).</p> -<p>700 The place of this miracle is described in two ways: in general and in particular. The general -place is Jerusalem; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">After this, </span>i.e., after the miracle performed in Galilee, <span style="font-weight: bold">there was -a Jewish festival, </span>that is Pentecost, according to Chrysostom. For above, when Christ went to -Jerusalem, it was the Passover that was mentioned; and now, on the following festival of -Pentecost, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus went up to Jerusalem </span>again. For as we read in Exodus (23:17), the Lord -commanded that all Jewish males be presented in the temple three times a year: on the festival -days of the Passover, Pentecost, and the Dedication.</p> -<p>There were two reasons why our Lord went up to Jerusalem for these festivals. First, so that he -would not seem to oppose the law, for he said himself: “I have not come to destroy the law, but -to complete it” (Mt 5:17); and in order to draw the many people gathered there on the feast days -to God by his signs and teaching: “I will praise him in the midst of the people” (Ps 108:30); and -again, “I have declared your justice in the great assembly” (Ps 39:10). So Christ himself says, as -we read below (18:20): “1 have spoken openly to the world.”</p> -<p>701 The specific place of the miracle was the pool called the Sheep Pool; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Now at -Jerusalem there is a Sheep Pool. </span>This is described here in four ways: by its name, its structure, -from its occupants, and from its power.</p> -<p>702 First, it is described from its name when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">there is a Sheep Pool </span>(<i>probatica piscina</i>),<i> -</i>for <i>probaton </i>is Greek for “sheep.” It was called the Sheep Pool for it was there that the priests -washed the sacrificial animals; especially the sheep, who were used more than the other animals. -And so in Hebrew it was called <span style="font-weight: bold">Bethsaida, </span>that is, the “house of sheep.” This pool was located +<body style="text-align:justify"> +<blockquote> +<center> +<p><span style="font-size: 60pt">5</span></p> +<p><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 1</span></p> +</center> +<blockquote> +<p>1 After this there was a Jewish festival, and Jesus went up to +Jerusalem. 2 Now at Jerusalem there is a Sheep Pool, called in +Hebrew Bethsaida, having five porticoes. 3 In these porticoes lay a +great number of people: feeble, blind, lame and withered, waiting +for the movement of the water. 4 From time to time an angel of the +Lord used to come down into the pool and the water was stirred up, +and the first one into the pool after it was stirred was healed of +whatever ailment he had. 5 There was one man lying there who had +been sick for thirty-eight years with his infirmity. 6 Jesus, +seeing him lying there and knowing that he had been sick a long +time, said to him, “Do you wish to be healed?” 7 The +sick man said, “Sir, I have no one to plunge me into the pool +once the water is stirred up. By the time I get there, someone else +has gone in before me.” 8 Jesus said to him, “Stand up, +pick up your mat and walk!” 9a The man was immediately cured; +he picked up his mat, and walked.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>699 Above, our Lord dealt with spiritual rebirth; here he deals +with the benefits God gives to those who are spiritually reborn. +Now we see that parents give three things to those who are +physically born from them: life, nourishment, and instruction or +discipline. And those who are spiritually reborn receive these +three from Christ: spiritual life, spiritual nourishment, and +spiritual teaching. And so these three things are considered here: +first, the giving of spiritual life; secondly, the giving of +spiritual food (c 6); and thirdly, spiritual teaching (c 7).</p> +<p>About the first he does three things. First, he sets forth a +visible sign in which he shows Christ’s power to produce and +to restore life. This is the usual practice in this Gospel: to +always join to the teaching of Christ some appropriate visible +action, so that what is invisible can be made known through the +visible. Secondly, the occasion for this teaching is given (v 9b). +Thirdly, the teaching itself is given (v 19). As to the first he +does three things. First, the place of the miracle is given. +Secondly, the illness involved. Thirdly, the restoration of the +sick person to health (v 8).</p> +<p>700 The place of this miracle is described in two ways: in +general and in particular. The general place is Jerusalem; so he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">After this,</span> i.e., +after the miracle performed in Galilee, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">there was a Jewish festival,</span> that is +Pentecost, according to Chrysostom. For above, when Christ went to +Jerusalem, it was the Passover that was mentioned; and now, on the +following festival of Pentecost, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Jesus went up to Jerusalem</span> again. For as +we read in Exodus (23:17), the Lord commanded that all Jewish males +be presented in the temple three times a year: on the festival days +of the Passover, Pentecost, and the Dedication.</p> +<p>There were two reasons why our Lord went up to Jerusalem for +these festivals. First, so that he would not seem to oppose the +law, for he said himself: “I have not come to destroy the +law, but to complete it” (Mt 5:17); and in order to draw the +many people gathered there on the feast days to God by his signs +and teaching: “I will praise him in the midst of the +people” (Ps 108:30); and again, “I have declared your +justice in the great assembly” (Ps 39:10). So Christ himself +says, as we read below (18:20): “1 have spoken openly to the +world.”</p> +<p>701 The specific place of the miracle was the pool called the +Sheep Pool; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Now at +Jerusalem there is a Sheep Pool.</span> This is described here in +four ways: by its name, its structure, from its occupants, and from +its power.</p> +<p>702 First, it is described from its name when he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">there is a Sheep Pool</span> +(<i>probatica piscina</i>),for <i>probaton</i> is Greek for +“sheep.” It was called the Sheep Pool for it was there +that the priests washed the sacrificial animals; especially the +sheep, who were used more than the other animals. And so in Hebrew +it was called <span style="font-weight: bold">Bethsaida,</span> +that is, the “house of sheep.” This pool was located near the temple, and formed from collected rain water.</p> -<p>703 In its mystical sense, this pool, according to Chrysostom, has prefigured Baptism. For the -Lord, wishing to prefigure the grace of baptsim in different ways, first of all chose water: for this -washes the body from the uncleanness which came from contact with what was legally unclean -(Nm 19). Secondly, he gave this pool a power that expresses even more vividly than water the -power of Baptism: for it not only cleansed the body from its uncleanness, but also healed it from -its illness; for symbols are more expressive, the closer they approach the reality. Thus it signified -the power of Baptism: for as this water when applied to the body had the power (not by its own -nature, but from an angel) to heal its illness, so the water of Baptism has the power to heal and -cleanse the soul from sins: “He loved us, and washed us from our sins” (Rv 1:5). This is the -reason why the passion of Christ, prefigured by the sacrifices of the Old Law, is represented in -Baptism: “All of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus, have been baptized into his death” -(Rom 6:3).</p> -<p>According to Augustine, the water in this pool signified the condition of the Jewish people, -according to: “The waters are the peoples” (Rv 17:15). The Gentiles were not confined within -the limits of the divine law, but each of them lived according to the vanity of his heart (Eph -4:17). But the Jews were confined under the worship of the one God: “We were kept under the -law, confined, until the faith was revealed” (Gal 3:23). So this water, confined to the pool, -signified the Jewish people. And it was called the Sheep Pool, for the Jews were the special -sheep of God: “We are his people, his sheep” (Ps 94:7).</p> -<p>704 The pool is described in its structure as <span style="font-weight: bold">having five porticoes, </span>i.e., round about, so that a -number of the priests could stand and wash the animals without inconvenience. In the mystical -sense these five porticoes, according to Chrysostom, signify the five wounds in the body of -Christ; about which we read: “Put your hand into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but -believe” (below 20:27). But according to Augustine, these five porticoes signify the five books -of Moses.</p> -<p>705 The pool is also described from its occupants, for <span style="font-weight: bold">in these porticoes lay a great number -of people: feeble, blind, lame and withered. </span>The literal explanation of this is that since all the -afflicted persons gathered because of the curative power of the water, which did not always cure -nor cure many at the same time, it was inevitable that there be many hanging around waiting to -be cured. The mystical meaning of this, for Augustine, was that the law was incapable of healing -sins: “It is impossible that sins be taken away by the blood of bulls and goats” (Heb 10:4). The -law merely shed light on them, for “The knowledge of sin comes from the law” (Rom 3:20).</p> -<p>706 And so, subject to various illnesses, these people lay there, unable to be cured. They are -described in four ways. First, by their posture: for there they lay, i.e., clinging to earthly things -by their sins; for one who is lying down is in direct contact with the earth: “He had compassion -on them, for they were suffering, and lying like sheep without a shepherd” (Mt 9:36). But the just -do not lie down, but stand upright, toward the things of heaven: “They,” i.e., sinners, “are bound, -and have fallen down; but we,” the just, “have stood and are erect” (Ps 19:9).</p> -<p>Secondly, they are described as to their number, for there was a <span style="font-weight: bold">great number </span>of them: “The evil -are hard to correct, and the iiurnber of fools is infinite” (Ecc 1:15); and in Matthew (7:13): “The -road that leads to destruction is wide, and many go this way.”</p> -<p>Thirdly, these sick people are described as to their condition. And he mentions four things which -a person brings on himself through sin. First, a person who is ruled by sinful passions is made -listless or feeble: and so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">feeble</span>. So it is that Cicero calls certain passions of the soul, -such as anger and concupiscence and the like, illnesses of the soul. And the Psalm says: “Have -mercy on me, O Lord, for I am week” (Ps 6:3).</p> -<p>Secondly, due to the rule and victory of a man’s passions, his reason is blinded by consent; and -he says as to this, <span style="font-weight: bold">blind, </span>that is, through sins. According to Wisdom (2:21): “Their own evil -blinded them”; and in the Psalm (57:9): “Fire,” that is the fire of anger and concupiscence, “fell -on them, and they did not see the sun.”</p> -<p>Thirdly, a person who is feeble and blind is inconstant in his works and is, in a way, lame. So we -read in Proverbs (11:18): “The work of the wicked is unsteady.” With respect to this the -Evangelist says, lame. “How long will you be lame?” (1 Kgs 18:2 1).</p> -<p>Fourthly, a man who is thus feeble, blind in understanding, and lame in his exterior actions, -becomes dry in his affections, in the sense that all the fatness of devotion withers within him. -This devotion is sought in the Psalm (62:6): “May my soul be filled with fat and marrow.” With -respect to this the Evangelist says, withered. “My strength is dried up like baked clay” (Ps 21:16).</p> -<p>But there are some so afflicted by the lassitude of sin, who do not wait for the motion of the -water, wallowing in their sins, according to Wisdom (14:22): “They live in a great strife of -ignorance, and they call so many and great evils peace.” We read of such people: “They are glad -when they do evil, and rejoice in the worst of things” (Prv 2:14). The reason for this is that they -do not hate their sins: they do not sin from ignorance or weakness, but from malice. But others, -who do not sin from malice, do not wallow in their sins, but wait by desire for the motion of the -water. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">waiting. </span>“Every day of my service I wait for my relief to come” (Jb 14:14). -This is the ‘way those in the Old Testament waited for Christ: “I will wait for your salvation, O -Lord” (Gn 49:18).</p> -<p>707 Finally, the power of the pool is described, for it healed all physical illnesses in virtue of an -angel who came to it; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">From time to time an angel of the Lord used to come down -into the pool. </span>In certain ways, the power of this pool is like that of Baptism. It is like it, first, in -the fact that its power was unperceived: for the power of the water in this pool did not come from -its very nature, otherwise it would have healed at all times; its power was unseen, being from an -angel. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">From time to time an angel of the Lord used to come down into the pool. -</span>The water of Baptism is like this in that precisely as water it does not have the power to cleanse -souls, but this comes from the unseen power of the Holy Spirit, according to: “Unless one is born -again ofwater and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (above 3:5). It is like it, -in a second way, in its effect: for as the water of Baptism heals, so also the water of that pool -healed. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the first one into the pool was healed. </span>Further, God gave to that water the -power to heal so that men by washing might learn through their bodily health to seek their -spiritual health.</p> -<p>Yet the water of this pool differs from the water of Baptism in three ways. First, in the source of -its power: for the water in the pool produced health because of an angel, but the water of Baptism -produces its effect by the uncreated power not only of the Holy Spirit, but of the entire Trinity. -Thus the entire Trinity was present at the baptism of Christ: the Father in the voice, the Son in -person, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. This is why we invoke the Trinity in our -baptism.</p> -<p>Secondly, this water differs in its power: for the water in the pool did not have a continuous -power to cure, but only <span style="font-weight: bold">from time to time; </span>while the water of Baptism has a permanent power -to cleanse, according to: “On that day a fountain will be open to the house of David, and to the -inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse the sinner and the unclean” (Zee 13:1).</p> -<p>Thirdly, this water differs as regards the number of people healed: for only one person was cured -when the water of this pool was moved; but all are healed when the water of Baptism is moved. -And no wonder: for the power of the water in the pool, since it is created, is finite and has a finite -effect; but in the water of Baptism there is an infinite power capable of cleansing an infinite -number of souls, if there were such: “I will pour clean water upon you, and you will be cleansed -from all your uncleanness” (Ez 36:25).</p> -<p>708 According to Augustine, however, the angel signifies Christ, according to this reading of -Isaiah (9:6): “He will be called great counsel.” Just as the angel descended at certain times into -the pool, so Christ descended into the world at a time fixed by the Father: “The time is near” (Is -14:1); “When the fulness of time had come God sent his Son, made from a woman, inade under -the law” (Gal 4:4). Again, just as the angel was not seen except by the motion of the water, so -Christ was not known as to his divinity, for “If they had known, they would never have crucified -the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8). For as Isaiah (45:15) says: “Truly, you are a hidden God.” And -so the motion of the water was seen, but not the one who set it in motion, because, seeing the -weakness of Christ, the people did not know of his divinity. And just as the one who went into -the pool was healed, so a person who humbly believes in God is healed by his passion: “Justified -by faith, through the redemption which is in Christ, whoin God put forward as an expiation” -(Rom 3:24). Only one was healed, because no one can be healed except in the oneness or unity -of the Church: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 4:5). Therefore, woe to those who hate -unity, and divide men into sects.</p> -<p>709 Then (v 5), the Evangelist mentions the disability of a man who lay by the pool. First, we are -told how long he was disabled; and secondly, why it was so long (v 7).</p> -<p>7 10 He was disabled for a long time, for <span style="font-weight: bold">There was one man lying there who had been sick -for thirty-eight years with his infirmity. </span>This episode is very aptly mentioned: the man who -could not be cured by the pool was to be cured by Christ, because those whom the law could not -heal, Christ heals perfectly, according to: “God did what the law, weakened by the flesh, could -not do: by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and as a sin-offering, he -condemned sin in his flesh” (Rom 8:3), and in Sirach (36:6): “Perform new signs and wonders.”</p> -<p>711 The number thirty-eight is well-suited to his infirmity, for we see it associated with sickness -rather than with health. For, as Augustine says, the number forty signifies the perfection of -justice, which consists in observing the law. But the law was given in ten precepts, and was to -be preached to the four corners of the world, or be completed by the four Gospels, according to: -“The end of the law is Christ” (Rom 10:4). So since ten times four is forty, this appropriately -signifies perfect justice. Now if two is subtracted from forty, we get thirty-eight. This two is the -two precepts of charity, which effects perfect justice. And so this man was sick because he had -forty minus two, that is, his justice was imperfect, for “On these two commandments all the law -and the prophets depend” (Mt 22:40).</p> -<p>712 Now the reason for the length of the man’s illness is considered. First, we have the Lord’s -query; secondly, the sick man’s answer (v 7).</p> -<p>713 John says, Jesus, seeing him, the man, <span style="font-weight: bold">lying there. </span>Jesus saw him not only with his physical -eyes, but also with the eyes of his mercy; this is the way David begged to be seen, saying: -“Look.at me, O Lord, and have mercy on me” (Ps 85:16). And Jesus <span style="font-weight: bold">knowing that he had been -sick a long time</span>—which was repugnant to the heart of Christ as well as to the sick man himself: -“A long illness is a burden to the physician” (Sir 10:11)—said to him, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do you wish to be -healed? </span>He did not say this because he did not know the answer, for it was quite evident that the -man wanted to be healed, he said it to arouse the sick man’s desire, and to show his patience in -waiting so many years to be cured of his sickness. and in not giving up. We see from this that -he was all the worthier to be cured: “Act bravely, and let your heart be strengthened, all you who -hope in the Lord” (Ps 30:25). Jesus incites the man’s desires because we keep more securely what -we perceive with desire and more easily acquire. “Knock,” by your desire, “and it will be opened -to you,” as we read in Matthew (7:7).</p> -<p>Note that in other situations the Lord requires faith: “Do you believe that I can do this for you” -(Mt 9:28); but here he does not make any such demand. The reason is that the others had heard -of the miracles of Jesus, of which this man knew nothing. And so Jesus does not ask faith from -him until after the miracle has been performed.</p> -<p>714 Then (v 7), the answer of the sick man is given. Two reasons are given for the length of his -illness: his poverty and his weakness. As he was poor, he could not afford a man to plunge him -into the pool; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Sir, I have no one to plunge me into the pool. </span>Perhaps he thought, as -Chrysostom says, that Christ might even help to put him into the water. Someone else always -reached the pool before him because he was weak and not able to move fast; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">By the -time I get there, someone else has gone in before me. </span>He could say with Job: “I cannot help -myself” (Jb 6:13). This signifies that no mere man could save the human race, for all had sinned -and needed the grace of God. Mankind had to wait for the coming of Christ, God and man, by -whom it would be healed.</p> -<p>715 Now we see the man restored to health, i.e., the working of the miracle. First, the Lord’s -command is given; secondly, the man’s obedience (v 9).</p> -<p>716 The Lord commanded both the nature of the man and his will, for both are under the Lord’s -power. He commanded his nature when he said, Stand up. This command was not directed to the -man’s will, for this was not within the power of his will. But it was within the power of his -nature, to which the Lord gave the power to stand by his command. He gave two commands to -the man’s will: <span style="font-weight: bold">pick up your mat and walk! </span>The literal meaning for this is that these two things -were commanded in order to show that the man had been restored to perfect health. For in all his -miracles the Lord produced a perfect work, according to what was best in the nature of each case: -“The works of God are perfect” (Dt 32:4). Now this man was lacking two things: first, his own -energy, since he could not stand up by himself, thus our Lord found him lying by the pool. -Secondly, he lacked the help of others; so he said, <span style="font-weight: bold">I have no one. </span>So our Lord, in order that this -man might recognize his perfect health, ordered him who could not help himself to pick up his -mat, and him who could not walk to walk.</p> -<p>717 These are the three things which the Lord commands in the justification of a sinner. First, -he should <span style="font-weight: bold">stand up, </span>by leaving his sinful ways: “Rise up, you who sleep, and arise from the -dead” (Eph 5:14). Secondly, he is commanded to <span style="font-weight: bold">pick up your mat</span>, by making satisfaction for -the sins he has committed. For the mat on which a man rests signifies his sins. And so a man -takes up his mat when he begins to do the penance given to him for his sins. “I will bear the anger -of God, because I have sinned against him” (Mi 7:9). Thirdly, he is commanded to <span style="font-weight: bold">walk</span>, by -advancing in what is good, according to: “They will go from strength to strength” (Ps 83:8).</p> -<p>718 According to Augustine, this sick man was lacking two things: the two precepts of charity. -And so our Lord gives two commands to his will, which is perfected by charity: to take up his -mat, and to walk. The first concerns the love of neighbor, which is first in the order of doing; the -second concerns the love of God, which is first in the order of precept. Christ says, with respect -to the first, <span style="font-weight: bold">pick up you mat. </span>As if to say: When you are weak, your neighbor bears with you -and, like a mat, patiently supports you: “We who are stronger ought to bear with the infirmities -of the weak, and not seek to please ourselves” (Rom 15:1). Thus, after you have been cured, <span style="font-weight: bold">pick -up your mat, </span>i.e., bear and support your neighbor, who carried you when you were weak: “Carry -each other’s burdens” (Gal 6:2). About the second he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">walk, </span>by drawing near God; so we -read: “They will go from strength to strength” (Ps 83:8); “Walk while you have the light” (below -12:35).</p> -<p>719 Next we see the man’s obedience. First, the obedience of his nature, because, <span style="font-weight: bold">The man was -immediately cured. </span>And no wonder, because Christ is the Word through whom heaven and earth -were made: “He commanded and they were created” (Ps 148:5); “By the Word of the Lord the -heavens were made” (Ps 32:6). Secondly, we see the obedience of the man’s will: first, because -<span style="font-weight: bold">he picked up his mat, </span>and secondly, because he <span style="font-weight: bold">walked. </span>“We will do everything that the Lord -commands, and obey him” (Ex 24:7).</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 2</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p>9b That day, however, was a Sabbath. 10 Therefore the Jews told the man who had been cured, -“It is the Sabbath; it is not permitted for you to carry your mat.” 11 He replied to them, “He who -cured me said to me: ‘Pick up your mat and walk.’” 12 They then asked him, “Who is this man -who told you to pick up your mat and walk?” 13 But he who was cured had no idea who it was, -for Jesus had slipped away from the crowd that had gathered in that place. 14 Later, Jesus found -the man in the temple and said to him, “Remember, you have been made well; now do not sin -again lest something worse happen to you.” 15 The man went off and related to the Jews that it -was Jesus who had cured him. 16 For reasons like this the Jews began to persecute Jesus, because -he performed such works on the Sabbath. 17 But Jesus had a reply for them: “My Father works -even until now, and so do I.” 18 Consequently, the Jews tried all the harder to kill him, because -he not only broke the Sabbath rest, but even called God his own Father, making himself equal -to God.</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>720 Having seen a visible miracle which shows the power of Christ to restore spiritual life, we -now see an opportunity given to him to teach. This opportunity was the persecution launched -against him by the Jews. These Jews, who were envious of Christ, persecuted him for two -reasons: first, the above act of his mercy; secondly, his teaching of the truth (v 17). As to the first, -the Evangelist does three things. First, he gives the occasion for their persecution. Secondly, the -false accusation against the man who was just cured (v 10). And thirdly, their attempt to belittle +<p>703 In its mystical sense, this pool, according to Chrysostom, +has prefigured Baptism. For the Lord, wishing to prefigure the +grace of baptsim in different ways, first of all chose water: for +this washes the body from the uncleanness which came from contact +with what was legally unclean (Nm 19). Secondly, he gave this pool +a power that expresses even more vividly than water the power of +Baptism: for it not only cleansed the body from its uncleanness, +but also healed it from its illness; for symbols are more +expressive, the closer they approach the reality. Thus it signified +the power of Baptism: for as this water when applied to the body +had the power (not by its own nature, but from an angel) to heal +its illness, so the water of Baptism has the power to heal and +cleanse the soul from sins: “He loved us, and washed us from +our sins” (Rv 1:5). This is the reason why the passion of +Christ, prefigured by the sacrifices of the Old Law, is represented +in Baptism: “All of us who have been baptized into Christ +Jesus, have been baptized into his death” (Rom 6:3).</p> +<p>According to Augustine, the water in this pool signified the +condition of the Jewish people, according to: “The waters are +the peoples” (Rv 17:15). The Gentiles were not confined +within the limits of the divine law, but each of them lived +according to the vanity of his heart (Eph 4:17). But the Jews were +confined under the worship of the one God: “We were kept +under the law, confined, until the faith was revealed” (Gal +3:23). So this water, confined to the pool, signified the Jewish +people. And it was called the Sheep Pool, for the Jews were the +special sheep of God: “We are his people, his sheep” +(Ps 94:7).</p> +<p>704 The pool is described in its structure as <span style= +"font-weight: bold">having five porticoes,</span> i.e., round +about, so that a number of the priests could stand and wash the +animals without inconvenience. In the mystical sense these five +porticoes, according to Chrysostom, signify the five wounds in the +body of Christ; about which we read: “Put your hand into my +side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe” (below 20:27). +But according to Augustine, these five porticoes signify the five +books of Moses.</p> +<p>705 The pool is also described from its occupants, for +<span style="font-weight: bold">in these porticoes lay a great +number of people: feeble, blind, lame and withered.</span> The +literal explanation of this is that since all the afflicted persons +gathered because of the curative power of the water, which did not +always cure nor cure many at the same time, it was inevitable that +there be many hanging around waiting to be cured. The mystical +meaning of this, for Augustine, was that the law was incapable of +healing sins: “It is impossible that sins be taken away by +the blood of bulls and goats” (Heb 10:4). The law merely shed +light on them, for “The knowledge of sin comes from the +law” (Rom 3:20).</p> +<p>706 And so, subject to various illnesses, these people lay +there, unable to be cured. They are described in four ways. First, +by their posture: for there they lay, i.e., clinging to earthly +things by their sins; for one who is lying down is in direct +contact with the earth: “He had compassion on them, for they +were suffering, and lying like sheep without a shepherd” (Mt +9:36). But the just do not lie down, but stand upright, toward the +things of heaven: “They,” i.e., sinners, “are +bound, and have fallen down; but we,” the just, “have +stood and are erect” (Ps 19:9).</p> +<p>Secondly, they are described as to their number, for there was a +<span style="font-weight: bold">great number</span> of them: +“The evil are hard to correct, and the iiurnber of fools is +infinite” (Ecc 1:15); and in Matthew (7:13): “The road +that leads to destruction is wide, and many go this way.”</p> +<p>Thirdly, these sick people are described as to their condition. +And he mentions four things which a person brings on himself +through sin. First, a person who is ruled by sinful passions is +made listless or feeble: and so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">feeble</span>. So it is that Cicero calls +certain passions of the soul, such as anger and concupiscence and +the like, illnesses of the soul. And the Psalm says: “Have +mercy on me, O Lord, for I am week” (Ps 6:3).</p> +<p>Secondly, due to the rule and victory of a man’s passions, +his reason is blinded by consent; and he says as to this, +<span style="font-weight: bold">blind,</span> that is, through +sins. According to Wisdom (2:21): “Their own evil blinded +them”; and in the Psalm (57:9): “Fire,” that is +the fire of anger and concupiscence, “fell on them, and they +did not see the sun.”</p> +<p>Thirdly, a person who is feeble and blind is inconstant in his +works and is, in a way, lame. So we read in Proverbs (11:18): +“The work of the wicked is unsteady.” With respect to +this the Evangelist says, lame. “How long will you be +lame?” (1 Kgs 18:2 1).</p> +<p>Fourthly, a man who is thus feeble, blind in understanding, and +lame in his exterior actions, becomes dry in his affections, in the +sense that all the fatness of devotion withers within him. This +devotion is sought in the Psalm (62:6): “May my soul be +filled with fat and marrow.” With respect to this the +Evangelist says, withered. “My strength is dried up like +baked clay” (Ps 21:16).</p> +<p>But there are some so afflicted by the lassitude of sin, who do +not wait for the motion of the water, wallowing in their sins, +according to Wisdom (14:22): “They live in a great strife of +ignorance, and they call so many and great evils peace.” We +read of such people: “They are glad when they do evil, and +rejoice in the worst of things” (Prv 2:14). The reason for +this is that they do not hate their sins: they do not sin from +ignorance or weakness, but from malice. But others, who do not sin +from malice, do not wallow in their sins, but wait by desire for +the motion of the water. So he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">waiting.</span> “Every day of my service +I wait for my relief to come” (Jb 14:14). This is the +‘way those in the Old Testament waited for Christ: “I +will wait for your salvation, O Lord” (Gn 49:18).</p> +<p>707 Finally, the power of the pool is described, for it healed +all physical illnesses in virtue of an angel who came to it; so he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">From time to time an angel of +the Lord used to come down into the pool.</span> In certain ways, +the power of this pool is like that of Baptism. It is like it, +first, in the fact that its power was unperceived: for the power of +the water in this pool did not come from its very nature, otherwise +it would have healed at all times; its power was unseen, being from +an angel. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">From time to +time an angel of the Lord used to come down into the pool.</span> +The water of Baptism is like this in that precisely as water it +does not have the power to cleanse souls, but this comes from the +unseen power of the Holy Spirit, according to: “Unless one is +born again ofwater and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom +of God” (above 3:5). It is like it, in a second way, in its +effect: for as the water of Baptism heals, so also the water of +that pool healed. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the +first one into the pool was healed.</span> Further, God gave to +that water the power to heal so that men by washing might learn +through their bodily health to seek their spiritual health.</p> +<p>Yet the water of this pool differs from the water of Baptism in +three ways. First, in the source of its power: for the water in the +pool produced health because of an angel, but the water of Baptism +produces its effect by the uncreated power not only of the Holy +Spirit, but of the entire Trinity. Thus the entire Trinity was +present at the baptism of Christ: the Father in the voice, the Son +in person, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. This is why +we invoke the Trinity in our baptism.</p> +<p>Secondly, this water differs in its power: for the water in the +pool did not have a continuous power to cure, but only <span style= +"font-weight: bold">from time to time;</span> while the water of +Baptism has a permanent power to cleanse, according to: “On +that day a fountain will be open to the house of David, and to the +inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse the sinner and the +unclean” (Zee 13:1).</p> +<p>Thirdly, this water differs as regards the number of people +healed: for only one person was cured when the water of this pool +was moved; but all are healed when the water of Baptism is moved. +And no wonder: for the power of the water in the pool, since it is +created, is finite and has a finite effect; but in the water of +Baptism there is an infinite power capable of cleansing an infinite +number of souls, if there were such: “I will pour clean water +upon you, and you will be cleansed from all your uncleanness” +(Ez 36:25).</p> +<p>708 According to Augustine, however, the angel signifies Christ, +according to this reading of Isaiah (9:6): “He will be called +great counsel.” Just as the angel descended at certain times +into the pool, so Christ descended into the world at a time fixed +by the Father: “The time is near” (Is 14:1); +“When the fulness of time had come God sent his Son, made +from a woman, inade under the law” (Gal 4:4). Again, just as +the angel was not seen except by the motion of the water, so Christ +was not known as to his divinity, for “If they had known, +they would never have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor +2:8). For as Isaiah (45:15) says: “Truly, you are a hidden +God.” And so the motion of the water was seen, but not the +one who set it in motion, because, seeing the weakness of Christ, +the people did not know of his divinity. And just as the one who +went into the pool was healed, so a person who humbly believes in +God is healed by his passion: “Justified by faith, through +the redemption which is in Christ, whoin God put forward as an +expiation” (Rom 3:24). Only one was healed, because no one +can be healed except in the oneness or unity of the Church: +“One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 4:5). +Therefore, woe to those who hate unity, and divide men into +sects.</p> +<p>709 Then (v 5), the Evangelist mentions the disability of a man +who lay by the pool. First, we are told how long he was disabled; +and secondly, why it was so long (v 7).</p> +<p>7 10 He was disabled for a long time, for <span style= +"font-weight: bold">There was one man lying there who had been sick +for thirty-eight years with his infirmity.</span> This episode is +very aptly mentioned: the man who could not be cured by the pool +was to be cured by Christ, because those whom the law could not +heal, Christ heals perfectly, according to: “God did what the +law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: by sending his own Son in +the likeness of sinful flesh, and as a sin-offering, he condemned +sin in his flesh” (Rom 8:3), and in Sirach (36:6): +“Perform new signs and wonders.”</p> +<p>711 The number thirty-eight is well-suited to his infirmity, for +we see it associated with sickness rather than with health. For, as +Augustine says, the number forty signifies the perfection of +justice, which consists in observing the law. But the law was given +in ten precepts, and was to be preached to the four corners of the +world, or be completed by the four Gospels, according to: +“The end of the law is Christ” (Rom 10:4). So since ten +times four is forty, this appropriately signifies perfect justice. +Now if two is subtracted from forty, we get thirty-eight. This two +is the two precepts of charity, which effects perfect justice. And +so this man was sick because he had forty minus two, that is, his +justice was imperfect, for “On these two commandments all the +law and the prophets depend” (Mt 22:40).</p> +<p>712 Now the reason for the length of the man’s illness is +considered. First, we have the Lord’s query; secondly, the +sick man’s answer (v 7).</p> +<p>713 John says, Jesus, seeing him, the man, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">lying there.</span> Jesus saw him not only with +his physical eyes, but also with the eyes of his mercy; this is the +way David begged to be seen, saying: “Look.at me, O Lord, and +have mercy on me” (Ps 85:16). And Jesus <span style= +"font-weight: bold">knowing that he had been sick a long +time</span>—which was repugnant to the heart of Christ as +well as to the sick man himself: “A long illness is a burden +to the physician” (Sir 10:11)—said to him, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Do you wish to be healed?</span> He did not say +this because he did not know the answer, for it was quite evident +that the man wanted to be healed, he said it to arouse the sick +man’s desire, and to show his patience in waiting so many +years to be cured of his sickness. and in not giving up. We see +from this that he was all the worthier to be cured: “Act +bravely, and let your heart be strengthened, all you who hope in +the Lord” (Ps 30:25). Jesus incites the man’s desires +because we keep more securely what we perceive with desire and more +easily acquire. “Knock,” by your desire, “and it +will be opened to you,” as we read in Matthew (7:7).</p> +<p>Note that in other situations the Lord requires faith: “Do +you believe that I can do this for you” (Mt 9:28); but here +he does not make any such demand. The reason is that the others had +heard of the miracles of Jesus, of which this man knew nothing. And +so Jesus does not ask faith from him until after the miracle has +been performed.</p> +<p>714 Then (v 7), the answer of the sick man is given. Two reasons +are given for the length of his illness: his poverty and his +weakness. As he was poor, he could not afford a man to plunge him +into the pool; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Sir, I +have no one to plunge me into the pool.</span> Perhaps he thought, +as Chrysostom says, that Christ might even help to put him into the +water. Someone else always reached the pool before him because he +was weak and not able to move fast; so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">By the time I get there, someone else has gone +in before me.</span> He could say with Job: “I cannot help +myself” (Jb 6:13). This signifies that no mere man could save +the human race, for all had sinned and needed the grace of God. +Mankind had to wait for the coming of Christ, God and man, by whom +it would be healed.</p> +<p>715 Now we see the man restored to health, i.e., the working of +the miracle. First, the Lord’s command is given; secondly, +the man’s obedience (v 9).</p> +<p>716 The Lord commanded both the nature of the man and his will, +for both are under the Lord’s power. He commanded his nature +when he said, Stand up. This command was not directed to the +man’s will, for this was not within the power of his will. +But it was within the power of his nature, to which the Lord gave +the power to stand by his command. He gave two commands to the +man’s will: <span style="font-weight: bold">pick up your mat +and walk!</span> The literal meaning for this is that these two +things were commanded in order to show that the man had been +restored to perfect health. For in all his miracles the Lord +produced a perfect work, according to what was best in the nature +of each case: “The works of God are perfect” (Dt 32:4). +Now this man was lacking two things: first, his own energy, since +he could not stand up by himself, thus our Lord found him lying by +the pool. Secondly, he lacked the help of others; so he said, +<span style="font-weight: bold">I have no one.</span> So our Lord, +in order that this man might recognize his perfect health, ordered +him who could not help himself to pick up his mat, and him who +could not walk to walk.</p> +<p>717 These are the three things which the Lord commands in the +justification of a sinner. First, he should <span style= +"font-weight: bold">stand up,</span> by leaving his sinful ways: +“Rise up, you who sleep, and arise from the dead” (Eph +5:14). Secondly, he is commanded to <span style= +"font-weight: bold">pick up your mat</span>, by making satisfaction +for the sins he has committed. For the mat on which a man rests +signifies his sins. And so a man takes up his mat when he begins to +do the penance given to him for his sins. “I will bear the +anger of God, because I have sinned against him” (Mi 7:9). +Thirdly, he is commanded to <span style= +"font-weight: bold">walk</span>, by advancing in what is good, +according to: “They will go from strength to strength” +(Ps 83:8).</p> +<p>718 According to Augustine, this sick man was lacking two +things: the two precepts of charity. And so our Lord gives two +commands to his will, which is perfected by charity: to take up his +mat, and to walk. The first concerns the love of neighbor, which is +first in the order of doing; the second concerns the love of God, +which is first in the order of precept. Christ says, with respect +to the first, <span style="font-weight: bold">pick up you +mat.</span> As if to say: When you are weak, your neighbor bears +with you and, like a mat, patiently supports you: “We who are +stronger ought to bear with the infirmities of the weak, and not +seek to please ourselves” (Rom 15:1). Thus, after you have +been cured, <span style="font-weight: bold">pick up your +mat,</span> i.e., bear and support your neighbor, who carried you +when you were weak: “Carry each other’s burdens” +(Gal 6:2). About the second he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">walk,</span> by drawing near God; so we read: +“They will go from strength to strength” (Ps 83:8); +“Walk while you have the light” (below 12:35).</p> +<p>719 Next we see the man’s obedience. First, the obedience +of his nature, because, <span style="font-weight: bold">The man was +immediately cured.</span> And no wonder, because Christ is the Word +through whom heaven and earth were made: “He commanded and +they were created” (Ps 148:5); “By the Word of the Lord +the heavens were made” (Ps 32:6). Secondly, we see the +obedience of the man’s will: first, because <span style= +"font-weight: bold">he picked up his mat,</span> and secondly, +because he <span style="font-weight: bold">walked.</span> “We +will do everything that the Lord commands, and obey him” (Ex +24:7).</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 2</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p>9b That day, however, was a Sabbath. 10 Therefore the Jews told +the man who had been cured, “It is the Sabbath; it is not +permitted for you to carry your mat.” 11 He replied to them, +“He who cured me said to me: ‘Pick up your mat and +walk.’” 12 They then asked him, “Who is this man +who told you to pick up your mat and walk?” 13 But he who was +cured had no idea who it was, for Jesus had slipped away from the +crowd that had gathered in that place. 14 Later, Jesus found the +man in the temple and said to him, “Remember, you have been +made well; now do not sin again lest something worse happen to +you.” 15 The man went off and related to the Jews that it was +Jesus who had cured him. 16 For reasons like this the Jews began to +persecute Jesus, because he performed such works on the Sabbath. 17 +But Jesus had a reply for them: “My Father works even until +now, and so do I.” 18 Consequently, the Jews tried all the +harder to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath rest, but +even called God his own Father, making himself equal to God.</p> +</blockquote> +<p>720 Having seen a visible miracle which shows the power of +Christ to restore spiritual life, we now see an opportunity given +to him to teach. This opportunity was the persecution launched +against him by the Jews. These Jews, who were envious of Christ, +persecuted him for two reasons: first, the above act of his mercy; +secondly, his teaching of the truth (v 17). As to the first, the +Evangelist does three things. First, he gives the occasion for +their persecution. Secondly, the false accusation against the man +who was just cured (v 10). And thirdly, their attempt to belittle Christ (v 12).</p> -<p>721 Their opportunity to persecute Christ was the fact that he cured the man on the Sabbath; -accordingly, the Evangelist says, <span style="font-weight: bold">That day, however, was a Sabbath, </span>when Christ performed -the miracle ofcommanding the man to pick up his mat.</p> -<p>Three reasons are given why our Lord began to work on the Sabbath. The first is given by -Ambrose, in his commentary, <i>On Luke. </i>He says that Christ came to renovate the work of -creation, that is, man, who had become deformed. And so he should have begun where the -Creator had left off the work of creation, that is, on a Sabbath, as mentioned in Genesis (c 1). -Thus Christ began to work on the Sabbath to show that he was the renovator of the whole -creature.</p> -<p>Another reason was that the Sabbath day was celebrated by the Jews in memory of the first -creation. But Christ came to make, in a way, a new creature, according to Galatians (6:15): “In -Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor the lack of circumcision is a benefit; what counts is a new -creation,” i.e., through grace, which comes through the Holy Spirit: “You will send forth your -Spirit, and they will be created ; and you will renew the face of the earth” (Ps 103:30). And so -Christ worked on the Sabbath to show that a new creation, a re-creation, was taking place through -him: “that we might be the first fruits of his creatures” (Jas 1:18).</p> -<p>The third reason was to show that he was about to do what the law could not do: “God did what -the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful -flesh, he condemned sin in his flesh, in order that the requirements of the law might be -accomplished in us” (Rom 8:3).</p> -<p>The Jews, however, did not do any work on the Sabbath, as a symbol that there were certain -things pertaining to the Sabbath which were to be accomplished, but which the law could not do. -This is clear in the four things which God ordained for the Sabbath: for he sanctified the Sabbath -day, blessed it, completed his work on it, and then rested. These things the law was not able to -do. It could not sanctify; so we read: “Save me, O Lord, for there are no holy people left” (Ps -11:1). Nor could it bless; rather, “Those who rely on the works of the law are under a curse” (Gal -3:10). Neither could it, complete and perfect, because “the law brought nothing to perfection” -(Heb 7:19). Nor could it bring perfect rest: “If Joshua had given them rest, God would not be -speaking after of another day” (Heb 4:8).</p> -<p>These things, which the law could not do, Christ did. For he sanctified the people by his passion: -“Jesus, in order to sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered outside the gate” (Heb 13:12). -He blessed them by an inpouring of grace: “Blessed be God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, -who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing of heaven, in Christ” (Eph 1:3). He brought the -people to perfection by instructing them in the ways of perfect justice: “Be perfect, as your -heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt 5:48). He also led them to true rest: “We who have believed will -find rest,” as is said in Hebrews (4:3). Therefore, it is proper for him to work on the Sabbath, who -is able to make perfect those things that pertain to the Sabbath, from which an impotent law +<p>721 Their opportunity to persecute Christ was the fact that he +cured the man on the Sabbath; accordingly, the Evangelist says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">That day, however, was a +Sabbath,</span> when Christ performed the miracle ofcommanding the +man to pick up his mat.</p> +<p>Three reasons are given why our Lord began to work on the +Sabbath. The first is given by Ambrose, in his commentary, <i>On +Luke.</i> He says that Christ came to renovate the work of +creation, that is, man, who had become deformed. And so he should +have begun where the Creator had left off the work of creation, +that is, on a Sabbath, as mentioned in Genesis (c 1). Thus Christ +began to work on the Sabbath to show that he was the renovator of +the whole creature.</p> +<p>Another reason was that the Sabbath day was celebrated by the +Jews in memory of the first creation. But Christ came to make, in a +way, a new creature, according to Galatians (6:15): “In +Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor the lack of circumcision is +a benefit; what counts is a new creation,” i.e., through +grace, which comes through the Holy Spirit: “You will send +forth your Spirit, and they will be created ; and you will renew +the face of the earth” (Ps 103:30). And so Christ worked on +the Sabbath to show that a new creation, a re-creation, was taking +place through him: “that we might be the first fruits of his +creatures” (Jas 1:18).</p> +<p>The third reason was to show that he was about to do what the +law could not do: “God did what the law, weakened by the +flesh, could not do: by sending his own Son in the likeness of +sinful flesh, he condemned sin in his flesh, in order that the +requirements of the law might be accomplished in us” (Rom +8:3).</p> +<p>The Jews, however, did not do any work on the Sabbath, as a +symbol that there were certain things pertaining to the Sabbath +which were to be accomplished, but which the law could not do. This +is clear in the four things which God ordained for the Sabbath: for +he sanctified the Sabbath day, blessed it, completed his work on +it, and then rested. These things the law was not able to do. It +could not sanctify; so we read: “Save me, O Lord, for there +are no holy people left” (Ps 11:1). Nor could it bless; +rather, “Those who rely on the works of the law are under a +curse” (Gal 3:10). Neither could it, complete and perfect, +because “the law brought nothing to perfection” (Heb +7:19). Nor could it bring perfect rest: “If Joshua had given +them rest, God would not be speaking after of another day” +(Heb 4:8).</p> +<p>These things, which the law could not do, Christ did. For he +sanctified the people by his passion: “Jesus, in order to +sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered outside the +gate” (Heb 13:12). He blessed them by an inpouring of grace: +“Blessed be God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has +blessed us with every spiritual blessing of heaven, in +Christ” (Eph 1:3). He brought the people to perfection by +instructing them in the ways of perfect justice: “Be perfect, +as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt 5:48). He also led +them to true rest: “We who have believed will find +rest,” as is said in Hebrews (4:3). Therefore, it is proper +for him to work on the Sabbath, who is able to make perfect those +things that pertain to the Sabbath, from which an impotent law rested.</p> -<p>722 Then (v 10), the Evangelist gives the accusation brought against the man who was healed. -First, we have the accusation; and secondly, the explanation given by the man who was healed -(v 11).</p> -<p>723 The man was accused for carrying his mat on the Sabbath, and not for being healed; so they -say: <span style="font-weight: bold">It is the Sabbath; it is not permitted for you to carry your mat. </span>There are several reasons -foi this. One is that the Jews, although frequently charging Christ with healing on the Sabbath, -had been embarrassed by him on the ground that they themselves used to pull their cattle from -ditches on the Sabbath in order to save them. For this reason the Jews did not mention his -healing, as it was useful and necessary; but they charge him with carrying his mat, which did not -seem to be necessary. As if to say: Although your cure need not have been postponed, there was -no need for you to carry your mat, or for the order to carry it. Another reason was that the Lord -had shown, contrary to their opinion, that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath. And so, -because being healed is not the same as doing good, but being done a good, they attack the one -healed rather than the one healing. The third reason was that the Jews thought that they were -forbidden by the law to do any work on the Sabbath; and it was the carrying of burdens that was -especially forbidden on the Sabbath: “Do not carry a burden on the Sabbath” (Jer 17:2 1). -Accordingly, they made a special point of being against the carrying of anything on the Sabbath, -as being opposed to the teaching of the prophet. But this command of the prophet was mystical: -for when he forbade them to carry burdens, he wanted to encourage them to rest from the burdens -of their sins on the Sabbath. Of these sins it is said: “My iniquities are a heavy burden and have -weighed me down” (Ps 37.5). Therefore, since the time had come to explain the meaning of -obscure symbols, Christ commanded him to take up his mat, i.e, to help his neighbors in their -weaknesses: “Bear one another’s burdens, and so you will fulfil the law of Christ” (Gal 6:2).</p> -<p>724 Then (v 11), we see the man who was healed defending himself. His defense is wisely taken: -for a doctrine is never so well proved to be divinely inspired as by miracles which can be -accomplished only by divine power: “Going out, they preached everywhere, and the Lord worked -with them and confirmed the word by the signs that followed” (Mk 16:20). Thus he argued with -those who were defaming the one who healed him, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">He who cured me said to me. </span>As if -to say: You say that I am forbidden to carry a burden on the Sabbath, and this on divine authority; -but I was commanded by the same authority to pick up my mat. For, <span style="font-weight: bold">he who cured me, </span>and by -restoring my health showed that he had divine power, said to me, <span style="font-weight: bold">Pick up your mat and walk. -</span>Therefore, I was duty bound to obey the commands of one who has such power and who had -done me such a favor. “I will never forget your precepts because you have brought me to life by -them” (Ps 118:93).</p> -<p>725 Then, since they could not very well charge the man who was cured, they try to belittle -Christ’s cure, for this man defended himself through Christ. But since he did not indicate -precisely who he was, they maliciously ask him who it was. With respect to this, first, the search -for Christ is set down. Secondly, his discovery. And thirdly, his persecution (v 16).</p> -<p>726 Three things are mentioned about the first: the Jews’ interrogation; the ignorance of the man -who was cured, and the cause of that ignorance.</p> -<p>As to the first, we read: <span style="font-weight: bold">They then asked him, </span>not with the good intention of making progress, -but for the evil purpose of persecuting and destroying Christ: “You will seek me, and you will -die in your sin” (below 8:21), Their very words show their malice: for while our Lord had -commanded the man who was sick to become healed and to pick up his mat, they ignored the -first, which is an undeniable sign of divine power, and harped on the second, which seemed to -be against the law, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">Who is this man who told you to pick up you mat and walk? </span>“He -lies in wait, and turns good into evil, and he will put blame,” i.e., attempt to put blame, “on the -elect” (Sir 11:33).</p> -<p>727 As to the second, the Evangelist says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But he who was cured had no idea who it was. </span>This -cured man signifies those who believe and have been healed by the grace of Christ: “You are -saved by grace” (Eph 2:8). Indeed, they do not know who Christ is, but they know only his -effects: “While we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord: for we walk by faith, and not -by sight” (2 Cor 5:6). We will know who Christ is when “we shall see him as he is,” as said in -1 John (3:2).</p> -<p>728 Next, the Evangelist gives the reason for the man’s ignorance, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">for Jesus had slipped -away from the crowd that had gathered in that place. </span>There are both literal and mystical -reasons why Christ left. Of the two literal reasons, the first is to give us the example of -concealing our good deeds and of not using them to seek the applause of men: “Take care not to -perform your good actions in the sight of men, in order to be seen by them” (Mt 6:1). The second -literal reason is to show us that, in all ouractions, we should leave and avoid those who are -envious, so as not to feed and increase their envy: “Do not be provoked by one who speaks evil -of you, so he will not trap you by your own words” (Sir 8:14).</p> -<p>There are also two mystical reasons why Christ slipped away. First, it teaches us that Christ is -not easy to find in the midst of men, or in the whirlwind of temporal cares; rather, he is found in -spiritual seclusion: “I will lead her into the wilderness, and there I will speak to her heart” (Hos -2:14); and in Ecclesiastes (9.17): “The words of the wise are heard in silence.” Secondly, this -suggests to us that Christ was to leave the Jews for the Gentiles: “He hid his face for a while from -the house of Jacob” (Is 8:17), i.e., he withdrew the knowledge of his truth from the Jewish -people.</p> -<p>729 Then (v 14), the Evangelist tells us how Jesus was found. First, he says that he was found. -Secondly, that after having been found, he taught. Thirdly, that after having taught, his identity +<p>722 Then (v 10), the Evangelist gives the accusation brought +against the man who was healed. First, we have the accusation; and +secondly, the explanation given by the man who was healed (v +11).</p> +<p>723 The man was accused for carrying his mat on the Sabbath, and +not for being healed; so they say: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">It is the Sabbath; it is not permitted for you +to carry your mat.</span> There are several reasons foi this. One +is that the Jews, although frequently charging Christ with healing +on the Sabbath, had been embarrassed by him on the ground that they +themselves used to pull their cattle from ditches on the Sabbath in +order to save them. For this reason the Jews did not mention his +healing, as it was useful and necessary; but they charge him with +carrying his mat, which did not seem to be necessary. As if to say: +Although your cure need not have been postponed, there was no need +for you to carry your mat, or for the order to carry it. Another +reason was that the Lord had shown, contrary to their opinion, that +it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath. And so, because being +healed is not the same as doing good, but being done a good, they +attack the one healed rather than the one healing. The third reason +was that the Jews thought that they were forbidden by the law to do +any work on the Sabbath; and it was the carrying of burdens that +was especially forbidden on the Sabbath: “Do not carry a +burden on the Sabbath” (Jer 17:2 1). Accordingly, they made a +special point of being against the carrying of anything on the +Sabbath, as being opposed to the teaching of the prophet. But this +command of the prophet was mystical: for when he forbade them to +carry burdens, he wanted to encourage them to rest from the burdens +of their sins on the Sabbath. Of these sins it is said: “My +iniquities are a heavy burden and have weighed me down” (Ps +37.5). Therefore, since the time had come to explain the meaning of +obscure symbols, Christ commanded him to take up his mat, i.e, to +help his neighbors in their weaknesses: “Bear one +another’s burdens, and so you will fulfil the law of +Christ” (Gal 6:2).</p> +<p>724 Then (v 11), we see the man who was healed defending +himself. His defense is wisely taken: for a doctrine is never so +well proved to be divinely inspired as by miracles which can be +accomplished only by divine power: “Going out, they preached +everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed the word by +the signs that followed” (Mk 16:20). Thus he argued with +those who were defaming the one who healed him, saying: +<span style="font-weight: bold">He who cured me said to me.</span> +As if to say: You say that I am forbidden to carry a burden on the +Sabbath, and this on divine authority; but I was commanded by the +same authority to pick up my mat. For, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">he who cured me,</span> and by restoring my +health showed that he had divine power, said to me, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Pick up your mat and walk.</span> Therefore, I +was duty bound to obey the commands of one who has such power and +who had done me such a favor. “I will never forget your +precepts because you have brought me to life by them” (Ps +118:93).</p> +<p>725 Then, since they could not very well charge the man who was +cured, they try to belittle Christ’s cure, for this man +defended himself through Christ. But since he did not indicate +precisely who he was, they maliciously ask him who it was. With +respect to this, first, the search for Christ is set down. +Secondly, his discovery. And thirdly, his persecution (v 16).</p> +<p>726 Three things are mentioned about the first: the Jews’ +interrogation; the ignorance of the man who was cured, and the +cause of that ignorance.</p> +<p>As to the first, we read: <span style="font-weight: bold">They +then asked him,</span> not with the good intention of making +progress, but for the evil purpose of persecuting and destroying +Christ: “You will seek me, and you will die in your +sin” (below 8:21), Their very words show their malice: for +while our Lord had commanded the man who was sick to become healed +and to pick up his mat, they ignored the first, which is an +undeniable sign of divine power, and harped on the second, which +seemed to be against the law, saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Who is this man who told you to pick up you mat +and walk?</span> “He lies in wait, and turns good into evil, +and he will put blame,” i.e., attempt to put blame, “on +the elect” (Sir 11:33).</p> +<p>727 As to the second, the Evangelist says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">But he who was cured had no idea who it +was.</span> This cured man signifies those who believe and have +been healed by the grace of Christ: “You are saved by +grace” (Eph 2:8). Indeed, they do not know who Christ is, but +they know only his effects: “While we are in the body, we are +absent from the Lord: for we walk by faith, and not by sight” +(2 Cor 5:6). We will know who Christ is when “we shall see +him as he is,” as said in 1 John (3:2).</p> +<p>728 Next, the Evangelist gives the reason for the man’s +ignorance, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">for Jesus had +slipped away from the crowd that had gathered in that place.</span> +There are both literal and mystical reasons why Christ left. Of the +two literal reasons, the first is to give us the example of +concealing our good deeds and of not using them to seek the +applause of men: “Take care not to perform your good actions +in the sight of men, in order to be seen by them” (Mt 6:1). +The second literal reason is to show us that, in all ouractions, we +should leave and avoid those who are envious, so as not to feed and +increase their envy: “Do not be provoked by one who speaks +evil of you, so he will not trap you by your own words” (Sir +8:14).</p> +<p>There are also two mystical reasons why Christ slipped away. +First, it teaches us that Christ is not easy to find in the midst +of men, or in the whirlwind of temporal cares; rather, he is found +in spiritual seclusion: “I will lead her into the wilderness, +and there I will speak to her heart” (Hos 2:14); and in +Ecclesiastes (9.17): “The words of the wise are heard in +silence.” Secondly, this suggests to us that Christ was to +leave the Jews for the Gentiles: “He hid his face for a while +from the house of Jacob” (Is 8:17), i.e., he withdrew the +knowledge of his truth from the Jewish people.</p> +<p>729 Then (v 14), the Evangelist tells us how Jesus was found. +First, he says that he was found. Secondly, that after having been +found, he taught. Thirdly, that after having taught, his identity was reported to the Jews.</p> -<p>730 The Evangelist tells us both where and the way in which Christ was found. The way in which -he was found was remarkable, for Christ is not found unless he first finds; hence he says, Later, -after the above events, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus found the man. </span>For we cannot find Jesus by our own power unless -Christ first presents himself to us; so we read: “Seek your servant” (Ps 118:176); and, “She -[wisdom] goes to meet those who desire her” (Wis 6:14).</p> -<p>The place Christ was found was holy, <span style="font-weight: bold">in the temple, </span>according to: “The Lord is in his holy -temple” (Ps 10:5). For his mother had also found him in the temple (Lk 2:46); and he was there -for he had to be concerned with his Father’s affairs. We see from this that this man was not cured -in vain, but having been converted to a religious way of life, he visited the temple and found -Christ: because if we desire to come to a knowledge of the Creator, we must run from the tumult -of sinful affections, leave the company of evil men, and flee to the temple of our heart, where -God condescends to visit and live.</p> -<p>731 After Christ was found, he began to teach (v 14). First, Christ reminded the man of the gift -he was given. Secondly, he offered him sound advice. And thirdly, he pointed out an imminent +<p>730 The Evangelist tells us both where and the way in which +Christ was found. The way in which he was found was remarkable, for +Christ is not found unless he first finds; hence he says, Later, +after the above events, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus found +the man.</span> For we cannot find Jesus by our own power unless +Christ first presents himself to us; so we read: “Seek your +servant” (Ps 118:176); and, “She [wisdom] goes to meet +those who desire her” (Wis 6:14).</p> +<p>The place Christ was found was holy, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">in the temple,</span> according to: “The +Lord is in his holy temple” (Ps 10:5). For his mother had +also found him in the temple (Lk 2:46); and he was there for he had +to be concerned with his Father’s affairs. We see from this +that this man was not cured in vain, but having been converted to a +religious way of life, he visited the temple and found Christ: +because if we desire to come to a knowledge of the Creator, we must +run from the tumult of sinful affections, leave the company of evil +men, and flee to the temple of our heart, where God condescends to +visit and live.</p> +<p>731 After Christ was found, he began to teach (v 14). First, +Christ reminded the man of the gift he was given. Secondly, he +offered him sound advice. And thirdly, he pointed out an imminent danger.</p> -<p>732 The gift was remarkable, for it was a sudden restoration to health; so he says, Remember, -you have been made well. Therefore, you should always keep this in mind, according to: “I will -remember the tender mercies of the Lord” (Is 63:7).</p> -<p>733 His advice, too, was useful, that is, <span style="font-weight: bold">do not sin again. </span>“My son, you have sinned. Do not sin -again” (Sir 21:1).</p> -<p>Why did our Lord mention sin to this paralytic and to certain others that he cured, and not to the -rest? He did this to show that illness comes to certain people as a result of their previous sins, -according to: “For this reason many of you are weak and sick, and many have died” (1 Cor -11:30). In this way he even showed himself to be God, pointing out sins and the hidden secrets -of the heart: “Hell and destruction are open to the Lord; how much more the hearts of the -children of men” (Prv 15:11). And so Christ mentioned sin only to some he cured and not to all, -for not all infirmities are due to previous sins: some come from one’s natural disposition, and -some are permitted as a trial, as with Job. Or, Christ might have brought up sin to some because -they were better prepared for his correction: “Do not rebuke one who mocks, lest he hate you; -rebuke a wise man, and he will love you” (Prv 9:8). Or, we could say, in telling some not to sin, -he intended his words for all the others.</p> -<p>734 The imminent danger was great, so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">lest something worse happen to you. </span>This can -be understood in two ways, according to the two events that preceded. For this man was first -punished with a troublesome infirmity, and then received a marvelous favor. Accordingly, -Christ’s statement can refer to each. To the first, for when anyone is punished for his sin, and the -punishment does not check him from sinning, it is just for him to be punished more severely. So -Christ says, <span style="font-weight: bold">do not sin again, </span>because if you do sin, something worse will happen to you: “I have -struck your children in vain” (Jer 2:30). It can refer to the second, for one who falls into sin after -receiving favors deserves a more severe punishment because of his ingratitude, as we see in 2 -Peter (2:20): “It would be better for them not to know the way of truth, than to turn back after -knowing it.” Also, because after a man has once returned to sin, he sins more easily, according -to Matthew (12:45): “The last state of that man becomes worse than the first”; and in Jeremiah -(2:20): “You broke your yoke a long time ago, and snapped off your chains, and said: I will not -serve.’”</p> -<p>735 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The man went off and related to the Jews, </span>we see Jesus identified. -Some think, as Chrysostom reports, that this man identified Jesus out of malice. But this does -not seem probable: that he would be so ungrateful after receiving such a favor. He <span style="font-weight: bold">related to the -Jews that it was Jesus who had cured him, </span>in order to make it clear that Christ had the power -to heal: “Come ... and I will tell you what great things the Lord has done for me,” as we read in -the Psalm (65:16). This is obvious, for they had asked him who commanded him to pick up his -mat, but he told them that <span style="font-weight: bold">it was Jesus who had cured him.</span></p> -<p>736 Next (v 16), we have the persecution of Christ, begun because he performed a work of mercy -on the Sabbath. Thus the Evangelist says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For reasons like this the Jews began to persecute -Jesus, because he performed such works on the Sabbath. </span>“Princes have persecuted me -without cause” (Ps 118:16 1).</p> -<p>737 Then (v 17), the second reason for his persecution is given: what he taught. First, we are -given the truth he taught; and secondly, the perversity of his persecutors (v 18).</p> -<p>73 8 Our Lord taught the truth while justifying his breaking of the Sabbath. Here we should note -that our Lord justified both himself and his disciples from breaking the Sabbath. He justified his -disciples, since they were men, by comparing them to other men: as the priests who, although -they worked in the temple on the Sabbath, did not break the Sabbath; and to David, who, while -Ahinielech was priest, took the consecrated bread from the temple oil the Sabbath when he was -running from Saul (1 Sm 21:1).</p> -<p>Our Lord, who was both God and man, sometimes justified himself in breaking the Sabbath by -comparing himself to men, as in Luke (14:5): “Which of you, if his donkey or ox falls into a pit, -will not take him out on the Sabbath?” And sometimes he justified himself by comparing himself -to God: particularly on this occasion, when he said: <span style="font-weight: bold">My Father works even until now, and so -do I. </span>As if to say: Do not think that my Father rested on the Sabbath in such a way that from that -time he does not work; rather, just as he is working even now without laboring, so I also am -working.</p> -<p>By saying this, Christ eliminated the misunderstanding of the Jews: for in their desire to imitate -God, they did not do any work on the Sabbath, as if God entirely ceased from work on that day. -In fact, although God rested on the Sabbath from producing new creatures, he is working always -and continuously even till now, conserving creatures in existence. Hence it is significant that -Moses used the word “rest,” after recounting the works of God from which he rested: for this -signifies, in its hidden meaning, the spiritual rest which God, by the example of his own rest, -promised to the faithful, after they have done their own good works. So we may say that this -command was a foreshadowing of something that lay in the future.</p> -<p>739 He expressly says, <span style="font-weight: bold">works even until now, </span>and not “has worked,” to indicate that God’s work -is continuous. For they might have thought that God is the cause of the world as a craftsman is -the cause of a house, i.e., the craftsman is responsible only for the making or coming into -existence of the house: in other words, just as the house continues in existence even when the -craftsman has ceased working, so the world would exist if God’s influence ceased. But according -to Augustine, God is the cause of all creatures in such a way as to be the cause of their existing: -for it his power were to cease even for a moment, all things in nature would at once cease to be, -just as we may say that the air is illuminated only as long as the light of the sun remains in it. The -reason for this is that things which depend on a cause only for their coming into existence, are -able to exist when that cause ceases; but things that depend on a cause not only for their coming -into existence but also to exist, need that cause for their continuous conservation in existence.</p> -<p>740 Further, in saying that <span style="font-weight: bold">My Father works even until now,</span> he rejects the opinion of those -who say that God creates through the instrumentality of secondary causes. This opinion conflicts -with Isaiah (26:12): “O Lord, you have accomplished all our works for LIS.” Therefore, just as -my <span style="font-weight: bold">Father, </span>who in the beginning created nature, <span style="font-weight: bold">works even until now, by </span>preserving and -conserving his creation by the same activity, so (to I work, because I am the Word of the Father, -through whom he accomplishes all things: “God said: ‘Let there be light’” (Gn 1:3). Thus, just -as he accomplished the first production of things through the Word, so also their conservation. -Consequently, if he <span style="font-weight: bold">works even until now, so do I, </span>because I am the Word of the Father, -through whom all things are made and conserved.</p> -<p>741 Then (v 18), the Evangelist mentions the persecution of Christ, which resulted from his -teaching: for it was because of his teaching that <span style="font-weight: bold">the Jews tried all the harder, </span>i.e., with greater -eagerness and a higher pitch of zeal, <span style="font-weight: bold">to kill him. </span>For in the law two crimes were punished by -death: the crime of breaking the Sabbath—thus anyone who gathered wood on the Sabbath was -stoned, as we see from Numbers (15:32); and the crime of blasphemy—so we read: “Bring the -blasphemer outside the camp ... and let all the children of Israel stone him” (Lv 24:14). Now they -thought it was blasphemy for a man to claim that he was God: “We are not stoning you for any -good work, but for blasphemy: because although you are a man, you make yourself God” (below -10:33). It was these two crimes they imputed to Christ: the first because he broke the Sabbath; -the second because he said he was equal to God. So the Evangelist says that <span style="font-weight: bold">the Jews tried all -the harder to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath rest, but even called God his -own Father.</span></p> -<p>Because other just man had also called God their Father, as in “You will call me ‘Father’” (Jer -3:19), they do not just say that he <span style="font-weight: bold">called God his own Father, </span>but added what made it -blasphemy, <span style="font-weight: bold">making himself equal to God, </span>which they understood from his statement: <span style="font-weight: bold">My -Father works even until now, and so do I. </span>He said that God was his Father so that we might -understand that God is his Father by nature, and the Father of others by adoption. He referred to -both of these when he said: “I am going to my Father,” by nature, “and to your Father,” by grace -(below 20:17). Again, he said that as the Father works, so he works. This answers the accusation -of the Jews about his breaking the Sabbath: for this would not be a valid excuse unless he had -equal authority with God in working. It was for this reason they said he made himself equal to -God.</p> -<p>742 How great then is the blindness of the Arians when they. say that Christ is less than God the -Father: for they cannot understand in our Lord’s words what the Jews were able to understand. -For the Arians say that Christ did not make himself equal to God, while the Jews saw this. There -is another way to settle this, from the very things mentioned in the text. For the Evangelist says -that the Jews persecuted Christ because he broke the Sabbath, because he said God is his Father, -and because he made hiniselfequal to God. But Christ is either a liar or equal to God. But if he -is equal to God, Christ is God by nature.</p> -<p>743 Finally, the Evangelist says, <span style="font-weight: bold">making himself equal to God, </span>not as though he was making -himself become equal to God, because he was equal to God through an eternal generation. -Rather, the Evangelist is speaking according to the understanding of the Jews who, not believing -that Christ was the Son of God by nature, understood him to say that he was the Son of God in -the sense of wishing to make himself equal to God; but they could not believe he was such: -“because although you are a man, you make yourself God” (below 10:33), i.e., you say that you -are God, understanding this as you wish to make yourself God.</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 3</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p>19 Jesus therefore replied and said to them:</p> -<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“Amen, amen, I say to you, -<br>the Son cannot do anything of himself, -<br>but only what he sees the Father doing. -<br>For whatever the Father does, -<br>the Son does likewise. -<br>20a For the Father loves the Son, -<BR>and shows him everything that he does.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>744 Here we have Christ’s teaching on his life-giving power. First, his teaching is presented. -Secondly, it is confirmed (v 3 1). Two things are done with the first. First, Christ’s teaching on -his life-giving power in general is given. Secondly, it is presented in particular (v 20b). As to the -first, three things are done. First, the origin of this power is mentioned. Secondly, the greatness -of this power, at (v 19b). Thirdly, the reason for each is given (v 20).</p> -<p>745 We should point out, with respect to the first, that the Arians use what Christ said here, <span style="font-weight: bold">the -Son cannot do anything of himself, </span>to support their error that the Son is less than the Father. -As the Evangelist said, the Jews persecuted Christ for making himself equal to God. But the -Arians say that when our Lord saw that this disturbed the Jews, he tried to correct this by stating -that he was not equal to the Father, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to you, the Son cannot do -anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing. </span>As if to say: Do not interpret -what I said, “My Father works even until now, and so do I, as meaning that I work as though I -am equal to the Father. for I cannot do anything of myself. Therefore, they say, because the Son -can do only <span style="font-weight: bold">what he sees the Father doing</span>, he is less than the Father. But this interpretation is -false and erroneous. For if the Son were not equal to the Father, then the Son would not be the -same as the Father; and this is contrary to: “I and the Father are one” (below 10:30). For equality -is considered with respect to greatness, which in divine realities is the essence itself. Hence, if -the Son were not equal to the Father, he would be different from him in essence.</p> -<p>746 To get the true meaning of Christ’s statement, we should know that in those matters which -seem to imply inferiority in the Son, it could be said, as some do, that they apply to Christ -according to the nature he assumed; as when he said: “The Father is greater than I” (below -14:28). According to this, they would say that our Lord’s statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything -of himself, </span>should be understood of the Son in his assumed nature. However, this does not stand -up, because then one would be forced to say that whatever the Son of God did in his assumed -nature, the Father had done before him. For example, that the Father had walked upon the water -as Christ did: otherwise, he would not have said, <span style="font-weight: bold">but only what he sees the Father doing.</span></p> -<p>And if we say that whatever Christ did in his flesh, God the Father also did in so far as the Father -works in him, as said below (14:10): “The Father, who lives in me, he accomplishes the works,” -then Christ would be saying that <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself, but only what he sees -the Father doing </span>in him, i.e., in the Son. But this cannot stand either, because Christ’s next -statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">For whatever the Father, does, the Son does likewise, </span>could not, in this -interpretation, be applied to him, i.e., to Christ. For the Son, in his assumed nature, never created -the world, as the Father did. Consequently, what we read here must not be understood as -pertaining to Christ’s assumed nature.</p> -<p>747 According to Augustine, however, there is another way of understanding statements which -seem to, but do not, imply inferriority in the Son: namely, by referring them to the origin of the -Son coming or begotten from the Father. For although the Son is equal to the Father in all things, -he receives all these things from the Father in an eternal begetting. But the Father gets these from -no one, for he is unbegotten. According to this explanation, the continuity of thought is the -following: Why are you offended because I said that God is my Father, and because I made -myself equal to the Father? <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself. </span>As -if to say: I am equal to the Father, but in such a way as to be from him, and not he from me; and -whatever I may do, is in me from the Father.</p> -<p>748 According to this interpretation, mention is made of the power of the Son when he says, can, -and of his activity when he says, do. Both can be understood here, so that, first of all, the -derivation of the Son’s power from the Father is shown, and secondly, the conformity of the -Son’s activity to that of the Father.</p> -<p>749 As to the first, Hilary explains it this way: Shortly above our Lord said that he is equal to the -Father. Some heretics, basing themselves on certain scriptural texts which assert the unity and -equality of the Son to the Father, claim that the Son is unbegotten. For example, the Sabellians, -who say that the Son is identical in person with the Father. Therefore, so you do not understand -this teaching in this way, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself, </span>for the Son’s power -is identical with his nature. Therefore the Son has his power from the same source as he has his -being (<i>esse</i>); but he has his being (<i>esse</i>)<i> </i>from the Father: “I came forth from the Father, and I -have come into the world” (Jn 16:28). He also has his nature from the Father, because he is God -from God; therefore, it is from him that the Son has his power (<i>posse</i>)<i>.</i></p> -<p>So his statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father -doing, </span>is the same as saying: The Son, just as he does not have his being (<i>esse</i>)<i> </i>except from the -Father, so he cannot do anything except from the Father. For in natural things, a thing receives -its power to act from the very thing from which it receives its being: for example, fire receives -its power to ascend from the very thing from which it receives its form and being. Further, in -saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself, </span>no inequality is implied, because this refers to -a relation; while equality and inequality refer to quantity.</p> -<p>750 Someone might misunderstand his saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">but only what he sees the Father doing, </span>and -take it to mean that the Son works or acts in the way he sees the Father acting, i.e., that the Father -acts first, and when the Son sees this, then the Son begins to act. It would be like two carpenters, -a master and his apprentice, with the apprentice making a cabinet in the way he saw the master -do. But this is not true for the Word, for it was said above (1:3): “All things were made through -him.” Therefore, the Father did not make something in such a way that the Son saw him doing -it and so learned from it.</p> -<p>But this is said so that the communication of paternity to the Son might be designated in terms -of begetting or generation, which is fittingly described by the verb sees, because knowledge is -conveyed to us by another through seeing and hearing. For we receive our knowledge from things -through seeing. and we receive knowledge from words through hearing, Now the Son is not other -than Wisdom, as we read: “I came forth out of the mouth of the Most High, the first-born before -all creatures” (Sir 24:5). Accordingly, the derivation of the Son from the Father is nothing other -than the derivation of divine Wisdom. And so, because the act of seeing indicates the derivation -of knowledge and wisdom from another, it is proper for the generation of the Son from the Father -to be indicated by an act of seeing; so that for the Son to see the Father doing something is -nothing other than to proceed by an intellectual procession from the acting Father.</p> -<p>Another possible explanation of this is given by Hilary. For him, the word sees eliminates all -imperfection from the generation of the Son or Word. For in physical generation, what is -generated changes little by little in the course of time from what is imperfect to what is perfect, -for such a thing is not perfect when it is first generated. But this is not so in eternal generation, -since this is the generation of what is perfect from what is perfect. And so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but only what -he sees the Father doing. </span>For since the act of seeing is the act of a perfect thing, it is plain that -the Son was begotten as perfect at once, as seeing at once, and not as coming to perfection over -a course of time.</p> -<p>751 Apropos of the second point, Chrysostom explains it as showing the conformity of the Father -to the Son in operation. So that the sense is: I say that it is lawful for me to work on the Sabbath, -because my Father, too, continues to work, and I cannot do anything opposed to him: and this is -because <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself. </span>For one does something of himself when he -does not conform himself to another in his actions. But whoever is from another sins, if he is -opposed to him: “Whoever speaks on his own, seeks his own glory” (below 7:18). Therefore, -whoever exists from another, but acts of himself, sins. Now the Son is from the Father; thus, if -he acts of himself, he sins; and this is impossible. So by saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of -himself, </span>he means nothing more than that the Son cannot sin. As if to say: You are persecuting -me unjustly for breaking the Sabbath, because I cannot sin, since I do not act in a way opposed +<p>732 The gift was remarkable, for it was a sudden restoration to +health; so he says, Remember, you have been made well. Therefore, +you should always keep this in mind, according to: “I will +remember the tender mercies of the Lord” (Is 63:7).</p> +<p>733 His advice, too, was useful, that is, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">do not sin again.</span> “My son, you +have sinned. Do not sin again” (Sir 21:1).</p> +<p>Why did our Lord mention sin to this paralytic and to certain +others that he cured, and not to the rest? He did this to show that +illness comes to certain people as a result of their previous sins, +according to: “For this reason many of you are weak and sick, +and many have died” (1 Cor 11:30). In this way he even showed +himself to be God, pointing out sins and the hidden secrets of the +heart: “Hell and destruction are open to the Lord; how much +more the hearts of the children of men” (Prv 15:11). And so +Christ mentioned sin only to some he cured and not to all, for not +all infirmities are due to previous sins: some come from +one’s natural disposition, and some are permitted as a trial, +as with Job. Or, Christ might have brought up sin to some because +they were better prepared for his correction: “Do not rebuke +one who mocks, lest he hate you; rebuke a wise man, and he will +love you” (Prv 9:8). Or, we could say, in telling some not to +sin, he intended his words for all the others.</p> +<p>734 The imminent danger was great, so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">lest something worse happen to you.</span> This +can be understood in two ways, according to the two events that +preceded. For this man was first punished with a troublesome +infirmity, and then received a marvelous favor. Accordingly, +Christ’s statement can refer to each. To the first, for when +anyone is punished for his sin, and the punishment does not check +him from sinning, it is just for him to be punished more severely. +So Christ says, <span style="font-weight: bold">do not sin +again,</span> because if you do sin, something worse will happen to +you: “I have struck your children in vain” (Jer 2:30). +It can refer to the second, for one who falls into sin after +receiving favors deserves a more severe punishment because of his +ingratitude, as we see in 2 Peter (2:20): “It would be better +for them not to know the way of truth, than to turn back after +knowing it.” Also, because after a man has once returned to +sin, he sins more easily, according to Matthew (12:45): “The +last state of that man becomes worse than the first”; and in +Jeremiah (2:20): “You broke your yoke a long time ago, and +snapped off your chains, and said: I will not +serve.’”</p> +<p>735 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The man +went off and related to the Jews,</span> we see Jesus identified. +Some think, as Chrysostom reports, that this man identified Jesus +out of malice. But this does not seem probable: that he would be so +ungrateful after receiving such a favor. He <span style= +"font-weight: bold">related to the Jews that it was Jesus who had +cured him,</span> in order to make it clear that Christ had the +power to heal: “Come ... and I will tell you what great +things the Lord has done for me,” as we read in the Psalm +(65:16). This is obvious, for they had asked him who commanded him +to pick up his mat, but he told them that <span style= +"font-weight: bold">it was Jesus who had cured him.</span></p> +<p>736 Next (v 16), we have the persecution of Christ, begun +because he performed a work of mercy on the Sabbath. Thus the +Evangelist says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For reasons like +this the Jews began to persecute Jesus, because he performed such +works on the Sabbath.</span> “Princes have persecuted me +without cause” (Ps 118:16 1).</p> +<p>737 Then (v 17), the second reason for his persecution is given: +what he taught. First, we are given the truth he taught; and +secondly, the perversity of his persecutors (v 18).</p> +<p>73 8 Our Lord taught the truth while justifying his breaking of +the Sabbath. Here we should note that our Lord justified both +himself and his disciples from breaking the Sabbath. He justified +his disciples, since they were men, by comparing them to other men: +as the priests who, although they worked in the temple on the +Sabbath, did not break the Sabbath; and to David, who, while +Ahinielech was priest, took the consecrated bread from the temple +oil the Sabbath when he was running from Saul (1 Sm 21:1).</p> +<p>Our Lord, who was both God and man, sometimes justified himself +in breaking the Sabbath by comparing himself to men, as in Luke +(14:5): “Which of you, if his donkey or ox falls into a pit, +will not take him out on the Sabbath?” And sometimes he +justified himself by comparing himself to God: particularly on this +occasion, when he said: <span style="font-weight: bold">My Father +works even until now, and so do I.</span> As if to say: Do not +think that my Father rested on the Sabbath in such a way that from +that time he does not work; rather, just as he is working even now +without laboring, so I also am working.</p> +<p>By saying this, Christ eliminated the misunderstanding of the +Jews: for in their desire to imitate God, they did not do any work +on the Sabbath, as if God entirely ceased from work on that day. In +fact, although God rested on the Sabbath from producing new +creatures, he is working always and continuously even till now, +conserving creatures in existence. Hence it is significant that +Moses used the word “rest,” after recounting the works +of God from which he rested: for this signifies, in its hidden +meaning, the spiritual rest which God, by the example of his own +rest, promised to the faithful, after they have done their own good +works. So we may say that this command was a foreshadowing of +something that lay in the future.</p> +<p>739 He expressly says, <span style="font-weight: bold">works +even until now,</span> and not “has worked,” to +indicate that God’s work is continuous. For they might have +thought that God is the cause of the world as a craftsman is the +cause of a house, i.e., the craftsman is responsible only for the +making or coming into existence of the house: in other words, just +as the house continues in existence even when the craftsman has +ceased working, so the world would exist if God’s influence +ceased. But according to Augustine, God is the cause of all +creatures in such a way as to be the cause of their existing: for +it his power were to cease even for a moment, all things in nature +would at once cease to be, just as we may say that the air is +illuminated only as long as the light of the sun remains in it. The +reason for this is that things which depend on a cause only for +their coming into existence, are able to exist when that cause +ceases; but things that depend on a cause not only for their coming +into existence but also to exist, need that cause for their +continuous conservation in existence.</p> +<p>740 Further, in saying that <span style="font-weight: bold">My +Father works even until now,</span> he rejects the opinion of those +who say that God creates through the instrumentality of secondary +causes. This opinion conflicts with Isaiah (26:12): “O Lord, +you have accomplished all our works for LIS.” Therefore, just +as my <span style="font-weight: bold">Father,</span> who in the +beginning created nature, <span style="font-weight: bold">works +even until now, by</span> preserving and conserving his creation by +the same activity, so (to I work, because I am the Word of the +Father, through whom he accomplishes all things: “God said: +‘Let there be light’” (Gn 1:3). Thus, just as he +accomplished the first production of things through the Word, so +also their conservation. Consequently, if he <span style= +"font-weight: bold">works even until now, so do I,</span> because I +am the Word of the Father, through whom all things are made and +conserved.</p> +<p>741 Then (v 18), the Evangelist mentions the persecution of +Christ, which resulted from his teaching: for it was because of his +teaching that <span style="font-weight: bold">the Jews tried all +the harder,</span> i.e., with greater eagerness and a higher pitch +of zeal, <span style="font-weight: bold">to kill him.</span> For in +the law two crimes were punished by death: the crime of breaking +the Sabbath—thus anyone who gathered wood on the Sabbath was +stoned, as we see from Numbers (15:32); and the crime of +blasphemy—so we read: “Bring the blasphemer outside the +camp ... and let all the children of Israel stone him” (Lv +24:14). Now they thought it was blasphemy for a man to claim that +he was God: “We are not stoning you for any good work, but +for blasphemy: because although you are a man, you make yourself +God” (below 10:33). It was these two crimes they imputed to +Christ: the first because he broke the Sabbath; the second because +he said he was equal to God. So the Evangelist says that +<span style="font-weight: bold">the Jews tried all the harder to +kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath rest, but even +called God his own Father.</span></p> +<p>Because other just man had also called God their Father, as in +“You will call me ‘Father’” (Jer 3:19), +they do not just say that he <span style="font-weight: bold">called +God his own Father,</span> but added what made it blasphemy, +<span style="font-weight: bold">making himself equal to God,</span> +which they understood from his statement: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">My Father works even until now, and so do +I.</span> He said that God was his Father so that we might +understand that God is his Father by nature, and the Father of +others by adoption. He referred to both of these when he said: +“I am going to my Father,” by nature, “and to +your Father,” by grace (below 20:17). Again, he said that as +the Father works, so he works. This answers the accusation of the +Jews about his breaking the Sabbath: for this would not be a valid +excuse unless he had equal authority with God in working. It was +for this reason they said he made himself equal to God.</p> +<p>742 How great then is the blindness of the Arians when they. say +that Christ is less than God the Father: for they cannot understand +in our Lord’s words what the Jews were able to understand. +For the Arians say that Christ did not make himself equal to God, +while the Jews saw this. There is another way to settle this, from +the very things mentioned in the text. For the Evangelist says that +the Jews persecuted Christ because he broke the Sabbath, because he +said God is his Father, and because he made hiniselfequal to God. +But Christ is either a liar or equal to God. But if he is equal to +God, Christ is God by nature.</p> +<p>743 Finally, the Evangelist says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">making himself equal to God,</span> not as +though he was making himself become equal to God, because he was +equal to God through an eternal generation. Rather, the Evangelist +is speaking according to the understanding of the Jews who, not +believing that Christ was the Son of God by nature, understood him +to say that he was the Son of God in the sense of wishing to make +himself equal to God; but they could not believe he was such: +“because although you are a man, you make yourself God” +(below 10:33), i.e., you say that you are God, understanding this +as you wish to make yourself God.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 3</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p>19 Jesus therefore replied and said to them:</p> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">“Amen, amen, I say to +you,<br /> +the Son cannot do anything of himself,<br /> +but only what he sees the Father doing.<br /> +For whatever the Father does,<br /> +the Son does likewise.<br /> +20a For the Father loves the Son,<br /> +and shows him everything that he does.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>744 Here we have Christ’s teaching on his life-giving +power. First, his teaching is presented. Secondly, it is confirmed +(v 3 1). Two things are done with the first. First, Christ’s +teaching on his life-giving power in general is given. Secondly, it +is presented in particular (v 20b). As to the first, three things +are done. First, the origin of this power is mentioned. Secondly, +the greatness of this power, at (v 19b). Thirdly, the reason for +each is given (v 20).</p> +<p>745 We should point out, with respect to the first, that the +Arians use what Christ said here, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself,</span> +to support their error that the Son is less than the Father. As the +Evangelist said, the Jews persecuted Christ for making himself +equal to God. But the Arians say that when our Lord saw that this +disturbed the Jews, he tried to correct this by stating that he was +not equal to the Father, saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to you, the Son cannot do +anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing.</span> +As if to say: Do not interpret what I said, “My Father works +even until now, and so do I, as meaning that I work as though I am +equal to the Father. for I cannot do anything of myself. Therefore, +they say, because the Son can do only <span style= +"font-weight: bold">what he sees the Father doing</span>, he is +less than the Father. But this interpretation is false and +erroneous. For if the Son were not equal to the Father, then the +Son would not be the same as the Father; and this is contrary to: +“I and the Father are one” (below 10:30). For equality +is considered with respect to greatness, which in divine realities +is the essence itself. Hence, if the Son were not equal to the +Father, he would be different from him in essence.</p> +<p>746 To get the true meaning of Christ’s statement, we +should know that in those matters which seem to imply inferiority +in the Son, it could be said, as some do, that they apply to Christ +according to the nature he assumed; as when he said: “The +Father is greater than I” (below 14:28). According to this, +they would say that our Lord’s statement, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself,</span> +should be understood of the Son in his assumed nature. However, +this does not stand up, because then one would be forced to say +that whatever the Son of God did in his assumed nature, the Father +had done before him. For example, that the Father had walked upon +the water as Christ did: otherwise, he would not have said, +<span style="font-weight: bold">but only what he sees the Father +doing.</span></p> +<p>And if we say that whatever Christ did in his flesh, God the +Father also did in so far as the Father works in him, as said below +(14:10): “The Father, who lives in me, he accomplishes the +works,” then Christ would be saying that <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself, but only +what he sees the Father doing</span> in him, i.e., in the Son. But +this cannot stand either, because Christ’s next statement, +<span style="font-weight: bold">For whatever the Father, does, the +Son does likewise,</span> could not, in this interpretation, be +applied to him, i.e., to Christ. For the Son, in his assumed +nature, never created the world, as the Father did. Consequently, +what we read here must not be understood as pertaining to +Christ’s assumed nature.</p> +<p>747 According to Augustine, however, there is another way of +understanding statements which seem to, but do not, imply +inferriority in the Son: namely, by referring them to the origin of +the Son coming or begotten from the Father. For although the Son is +equal to the Father in all things, he receives all these things +from the Father in an eternal begetting. But the Father gets these +from no one, for he is unbegotten. According to this explanation, +the continuity of thought is the following: Why are you offended +because I said that God is my Father, and because I made myself +equal to the Father? <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I +say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself.</span> As if to say: +I am equal to the Father, but in such a way as to be from him, and +not he from me; and whatever I may do, is in me from the +Father.</p> +<p>748 According to this interpretation, mention is made of the +power of the Son when he says, can, and of his activity when he +says, do. Both can be understood here, so that, first of all, the +derivation of the Son’s power from the Father is shown, and +secondly, the conformity of the Son’s activity to that of the +Father.</p> +<p>749 As to the first, Hilary explains it this way: Shortly above +our Lord said that he is equal to the Father. Some heretics, basing +themselves on certain scriptural texts which assert the unity and +equality of the Son to the Father, claim that the Son is +unbegotten. For example, the Sabellians, who say that the Son is +identical in person with the Father. Therefore, so you do not +understand this teaching in this way, he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself,</span> +for the Son’s power is identical with his nature. Therefore +the Son has his power from the same source as he has his being +(<i>esse</i>); but he has his being (<i>esse</i>) from the Father: +“I came forth from the Father, and I have come into the +world” (Jn 16:28). He also has his nature from the Father, +because he is God from God; therefore, it is from him that the Son +has his power (<i>posse</i>)<i>.</i></p> +<p>So his statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot +do anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father +doing,</span> is the same as saying: The Son, just as he does not +have his being (<i>esse</i>) except from the Father, so he cannot +do anything except from the Father. For in natural things, a thing +receives its power to act from the very thing from which it +receives its being: for example, fire receives its power to ascend +from the very thing from which it receives its form and being. +Further, in saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot +do anything of himself,</span> no inequality is implied, because +this refers to a relation; while equality and inequality refer to +quantity.</p> +<p>750 Someone might misunderstand his saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">but only what he sees the Father doing,</span> +and take it to mean that the Son works or acts in the way he sees +the Father acting, i.e., that the Father acts first, and when the +Son sees this, then the Son begins to act. It would be like two +carpenters, a master and his apprentice, with the apprentice making +a cabinet in the way he saw the master do. But this is not true for +the Word, for it was said above (1:3): “All things were made +through him.” Therefore, the Father did not make something in +such a way that the Son saw him doing it and so learned from +it.</p> +<p>But this is said so that the communication of paternity to the +Son might be designated in terms of begetting or generation, which +is fittingly described by the verb sees, because knowledge is +conveyed to us by another through seeing and hearing. For we +receive our knowledge from things through seeing. and we receive +knowledge from words through hearing, Now the Son is not other than +Wisdom, as we read: “I came forth out of the mouth of the +Most High, the first-born before all creatures” (Sir 24:5). +Accordingly, the derivation of the Son from the Father is nothing +other than the derivation of divine Wisdom. And so, because the act +of seeing indicates the derivation of knowledge and wisdom from +another, it is proper for the generation of the Son from the Father +to be indicated by an act of seeing; so that for the Son to see the +Father doing something is nothing other than to proceed by an +intellectual procession from the acting Father.</p> +<p>Another possible explanation of this is given by Hilary. For +him, the word sees eliminates all imperfection from the generation +of the Son or Word. For in physical generation, what is generated +changes little by little in the course of time from what is +imperfect to what is perfect, for such a thing is not perfect when +it is first generated. But this is not so in eternal generation, +since this is the generation of what is perfect from what is +perfect. And so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but only +what he sees the Father doing.</span> For since the act of seeing +is the act of a perfect thing, it is plain that the Son was +begotten as perfect at once, as seeing at once, and not as coming +to perfection over a course of time.</p> +<p>751 Apropos of the second point, Chrysostom explains it as +showing the conformity of the Father to the Son in operation. So +that the sense is: I say that it is lawful for me to work on the +Sabbath, because my Father, too, continues to work, and I cannot do +anything opposed to him: and this is because <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself.</span> +For one does something of himself when he does not conform himself +to another in his actions. But whoever is from another sins, if he +is opposed to him: “Whoever speaks on his own, seeks his own +glory” (below 7:18). Therefore, whoever exists from another, +but acts of himself, sins. Now the Son is from the Father; thus, if +he acts of himself, he sins; and this is impossible. So by saying, +<span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of +himself,</span> he means nothing more than that the Son cannot sin. +As if to say: You are persecuting me unjustly for breaking the +Sabbath, because I cannot sin, since I do not act in a way opposed to my Father.</p> -<p>Augustine makes use of both of these explanations, that of of Hilary and the one given by -Chrysostom, but in different places.</p> -<p>752 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise, </span>he affirms the -greatness of Christ’s power. He excludes three things in the power of Christ: limitation, -difference, and imperfection.</p> -<p>First, limitation is excluded. Since there are diverse agents in the world, and the first universal -agent has power over all other agents, but the other agents, which are from him, have a limited -power in proportion to their rank in the order of causality, some might think that since the Son -is not of himself, that he must have a power limited to certain existents, rather than a universal -power over all, as the Father has. And so to exclude this he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">whatever the Father does, </span>i.e., -to all the things to which the Father’s power extends, the Son’s power also extends: “All things -were made through him” (above 1:3).</p> -<p>Secondly, difference is excluded. For sometimes a thing that exists from another is able to do -whatever that from which it exists does. And yet the things the former does are not the same as -those done by that from which it is. For example, if one fire which exists from another can do -whatever that other does, i.e., cause combustion, the act of causing combustion would be -specifically the same in each, even though one fire ignites certain things and the other fire ignites -different things. And so that you do not think that the Son’s activity is different from the activity -of the Father in this way, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">whatever</span> the Father does, the Son does, i.e., not different -things, but the very same.</p> -<p>Thirdly, imperfection is excluded. Sometimes one and the same thing comes from two agents: -from one as the principal and perfect agent, and from the other as an instrumental and imperfect -agent. But it does not come in the same way, because the principal agent acts in a different way -from the instrumental agent: for the instrumental agent acts imperfectly, and in virtue of the -other. And so that no one thinks that this is the way the Son does whatever the Father does, he -says that whatever the Father does, the Son does <span style="font-weight: bold">likewise</span>, i.e., with the same power by which -the Father acts, the Son also acts; because the same power and the same perfection are in the -Father and the Son: “I was with him, forming all things” (Prv 8:30).</p> -<p>753 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For the Father loves the Son, </span>he gives the reason for each, i.e., for the -origin of the Son’s power and for its greatness. This reason is the love of the Father, who loves -the Son. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For the Father loves the Son.</span></p> -<p>In order to understand how the Father’s love for the Son is the reason for the origin or -communication of the Son’s power, we Should point out that a thing is loved in two ways. For -since the good alone is loveable, a good can be related to love in two ways: as the cause of love, -or as caused by love. Now in us, the good causes love: for the cause of our loving something is -its goodness, the goodness in it. Therefore, it is not good because we love it, but rather we love -it because it is good. Accordingly. in us, love is caused by what is good. But it is different with -God, because God’s love itself is the cause of the goodness in the things that are loved. For it is -because God loves us that we are good, since to love is nothing else than to will a good to -someone. Thus, since God’s will is the cause of things, for “whatever he willed he made” (Ps -113:3), it is clear that God’s love is the cause of the goodness in things. Hence Denis says in <i>The -Divine Names</i> (c. 4) that the divine love did not allow itself to be without issue. So, if we wish -to consider the origin of the Son, let us see whether the love with which the Father loves the Son, -is the principle of his origin, so that he proceeds from it.</p> -<p>In divine realities, love is taken in two ways: essentially, so far as the Father and the Son and the -Holy Spirit love; and notionally or personally, so far as the Holy Spirit proceeds as Love. But in -neither of these ways of taking love can it be the principle of origin of the Son. For if is is taken -essentially, it implies an act of the will; and if that were the sense in which it is the principle of -origin of the Son, it would follow that the Father generated the Son, not by nature, but by -will—and this is false. Again, love is not understood notionally, as pertaining to the Holy Spirit. -For it would then follow that the Holy Spirit would be the principle of the Son—which is also -false. Indeed, no heretic ever went so far as to say this. For although love, notionally taken, is the -principle of all the gifts given to us by God, it is nevertheless not the principle of the Son; rather +<p>Augustine makes use of both of these explanations, that of of +Hilary and the one given by Chrysostom, but in different +places.</p> +<p>752 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For +whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise,</span> he affirms +the greatness of Christ’s power. He excludes three things in +the power of Christ: limitation, difference, and imperfection.</p> +<p>First, limitation is excluded. Since there are diverse agents in +the world, and the first universal agent has power over all other +agents, but the other agents, which are from him, have a limited +power in proportion to their rank in the order of causality, some +might think that since the Son is not of himself, that he must have +a power limited to certain existents, rather than a universal power +over all, as the Father has. And so to exclude this he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">whatever the Father does,</span> +i.e., to all the things to which the Father’s power extends, +the Son’s power also extends: “All things were made +through him” (above 1:3).</p> +<p>Secondly, difference is excluded. For sometimes a thing that +exists from another is able to do whatever that from which it +exists does. And yet the things the former does are not the same as +those done by that from which it is. For example, if one fire which +exists from another can do whatever that other does, i.e., cause +combustion, the act of causing combustion would be specifically the +same in each, even though one fire ignites certain things and the +other fire ignites different things. And so that you do not think +that the Son’s activity is different from the activity of the +Father in this way, he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">whatever</span> the Father does, the Son does, +i.e., not different things, but the very same.</p> +<p>Thirdly, imperfection is excluded. Sometimes one and the same +thing comes from two agents: from one as the principal and perfect +agent, and from the other as an instrumental and imperfect agent. +But it does not come in the same way, because the principal agent +acts in a different way from the instrumental agent: for the +instrumental agent acts imperfectly, and in virtue of the other. +And so that no one thinks that this is the way the Son does +whatever the Father does, he says that whatever the Father does, +the Son does <span style="font-weight: bold">likewise</span>, i.e., +with the same power by which the Father acts, the Son also acts; +because the same power and the same perfection are in the Father +and the Son: “I was with him, forming all things” (Prv +8:30).</p> +<p>753 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For the +Father loves the Son,</span> he gives the reason for each, i.e., +for the origin of the Son’s power and for its greatness. This +reason is the love of the Father, who loves the Son. Thus he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">For the Father loves the +Son.</span></p> +<p>In order to understand how the Father’s love for the Son +is the reason for the origin or communication of the Son’s +power, we Should point out that a thing is loved in two ways. For +since the good alone is loveable, a good can be related to love in +two ways: as the cause of love, or as caused by love. Now in us, +the good causes love: for the cause of our loving something is its +goodness, the goodness in it. Therefore, it is not good because we +love it, but rather we love it because it is good. Accordingly. in +us, love is caused by what is good. But it is different with God, +because God’s love itself is the cause of the goodness in the +things that are loved. For it is because God loves us that we are +good, since to love is nothing else than to will a good to someone. +Thus, since God’s will is the cause of things, for +“whatever he willed he made” (Ps 113:3), it is clear +that God’s love is the cause of the goodness in things. Hence +Denis says in <i>The Divine Names</i> (c. 4) that the divine love +did not allow itself to be without issue. So, if we wish to +consider the origin of the Son, let us see whether the love with +which the Father loves the Son, is the principle of his origin, so +that he proceeds from it.</p> +<p>In divine realities, love is taken in two ways: essentially, so +far as the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit love; and +notionally or personally, so far as the Holy Spirit proceeds as +Love. But in neither of these ways of taking love can it be the +principle of origin of the Son. For if is is taken essentially, it +implies an act of the will; and if that were the sense in which it +is the principle of origin of the Son, it would follow that the +Father generated the Son, not by nature, but by will—and this +is false. Again, love is not understood notionally, as pertaining +to the Holy Spirit. For it would then follow that the Holy Spirit +would be the principle of the Son—which is also false. +Indeed, no heretic ever went so far as to say this. For although +love, notionally taken, is the principle of all the gifts given to +us by God, it is nevertheless not the principle of the Son; rather it proceeds from the Father and the Son.</p> -<p>Consequently, we must say that this explanation is not taken from love as from a principle (<i>ex -principio</i>), but as from a sign (<i>ex signo</i>)<i>. </i>For since likeness is a cause of love (for every animal -loves its like), wherever a perfect likeness of God is found, there also is found a perfect love of -God. But the perfect likeness of the Father is in the Son, as is said: “He is the image of the -invisible God” (1:15); and “He is the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the image of his -substance” (Heb 1:3). Therefore, the Son is loved perfectly by the Father, and because the Father -perfectly loves the Son, this is a sign that the Father has shown him everything and has -communicated to him his very own [the Father’s] power and nature. And it is of this love that -we read above (3:5): “The Father loves the Son, and has put everything into his hands”; and, -“This is my beloved. Son” (Mt 3:17).</p> -<p>754 With respect to what follows, <span style="font-weight: bold">and shows him everything that he does, </span>we should point out -that someone can show another his works in two ways: either by sight, as an artisan shows his -apprentice the things he has made, or by hearing, as when he verbally instructs him). In whatever -of these ways shows is understood, there can follow something which is not appropriate, that is, -something that is not present when the Father shows things to the Son. For if we say the Father -shows things to the Son by sight, then it follows, as with humans, that the Father first does -something which he then shows to the Son; and that he does this by himself, without the Son. But -the Father does not show the Son things which he did before, for the Son himself says: “The Lord -possessed me at the beginning of his ways, before he made anything” (Prv 8:22). Nor does the -Father show the Son things he has done without the Son, for the Father does all things through -the Son: “All things were made through him” (above 1:3). If <span style="font-weight: bold">shows </span>is understood as a kind of -hearing, two things seem to follow. For the one who teaches by word first points out something -to the one who is ignorant; again, the word is something intermediate between the one showing -and the one being shown. But it is in neither of these ways that the Father shows things to the -Son: for he does not do so to one who is ignorant, since the Son is the Wisdom of the Father: -“Christ is the power of God, and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:24); nor does the Father use some -intermediate word, because the Son himself is the Word of the Father: “The Word was with God” +<p>Consequently, we must say that this explanation is not taken +from love as from a principle (<i>ex principio</i>), but as from a +sign (<i>ex signo</i>)<i>.</i> For since likeness is a cause of +love (for every animal loves its like), wherever a perfect likeness +of God is found, there also is found a perfect love of God. But the +perfect likeness of the Father is in the Son, as is said: “He +is the image of the invisible God” (1:15); and “He is +the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the image of his +substance” (Heb 1:3). Therefore, the Son is loved perfectly +by the Father, and because the Father perfectly loves the Son, this +is a sign that the Father has shown him everything and has +communicated to him his very own [the Father’s] power and +nature. And it is of this love that we read above (3:5): “The +Father loves the Son, and has put everything into his hands”; +and, “This is my beloved. Son” (Mt 3:17).</p> +<p>754 With respect to what follows, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and shows him everything that he does,</span> +we should point out that someone can show another his works in two +ways: either by sight, as an artisan shows his apprentice the +things he has made, or by hearing, as when he verbally instructs +him). In whatever of these ways shows is understood, there can +follow something which is not appropriate, that is, something that +is not present when the Father shows things to the Son. For if we +say the Father shows things to the Son by sight, then it follows, +as with humans, that the Father first does something which he then +shows to the Son; and that he does this by himself, without the +Son. But the Father does not show the Son things which he did +before, for the Son himself says: “The Lord possessed me at +the beginning of his ways, before he made anything” (Prv +8:22). Nor does the Father show the Son things he has done without +the Son, for the Father does all things through the Son: “All +things were made through him” (above 1:3). If <span style= +"font-weight: bold">shows</span> is understood as a kind of +hearing, two things seem to follow. For the one who teaches by word +first points out something to the one who is ignorant; again, the +word is something intermediate between the one showing and the one +being shown. But it is in neither of these ways that the Father +shows things to the Son: for he does not do so to one who is +ignorant, since the Son is the Wisdom of the Father: “Christ +is the power of God, and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:24); nor +does the Father use some intermediate word, because the Son himself +is the Word of the Father: “The Word was with God” (above 1:1).</p> -<p>Therefore, it is said that the Father <span style="font-weight: bold">shows </span>all that he does to the Son, inasmuch as he gives the -Son a knowledge of all of his works. For it is in this way that a master is said to show something -to his disciple, inasmuch as he gives him a knowledge of the things he makes. Hence, according -to Augustine, for the Father to show anything to the Son is nothing more than for the Father to -beget or generate the Son. And for the Son to see what the Father does is nothing more than for -the Son to receive his being (<i>esse</i>)<i> </i>and nature from the Father.</p> -<p>Nevertheless, this showing can be considered similar to seeing insofar as the Son is the -brightness of the paternal vision, as we read in Hebrews (1:3): for the Father, seeing and -understanding himself, conceives the Son, who is the concept of this vision. Again, it can be -considered similar to hearing insofar as the Son proceeds from the Father as the Word. As if to -say: <span style="font-weight: bold">The Father shows him everything, </span>insofar he he generates him as the brightness and -concept of his own wisdom, and as the Word. Thus the words, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Father shows, </span>refer to what -was said before: <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father -doing. </span>And the word, everything, refers to, <span style="font-weight: bold">For whatever the Father does, the Son does -likewise.</span></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>20b “Indeed, he will show him even greater works than these, such that you will be amazed. 21 -For just as the Father raises the dead and grants life, so the Son grants life to those to whom he -wishes. 22 The Father himself judges no one, but he has given all judgment to the Son, 23 so that -all men may honor the Son as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not -honor the Father who sent him. 24 Amen, amen, I say to you, that whoever hears my voice and -believes in him who sent me, possesses eternal life; and he will not encounter judgment, but has -passed from death to life. 25 Amen, amen, I say to you, the hour is coming, and is now here, -when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear it will live.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>755 Having pointed out the power of the Son in general, he now shows it in more detail. First, -the Lord discloses his life-giving power. Secondly, he clarifies what seemed obscure in what was -said before (v 26). As to the first he does two things. First, he shows that the Son has life-giving -power. Secondly, he teaches how life is received from the Son (v 24). Concerning the first he -does three things. First, he presents the life-giving power of the Son. Secondly, he gives a reason -for what he says (v 22). Thirdly, he shows the effect of this (v 23). With respect to the first he -does two things. First, he sets forth this life-giving power in general. Secondly, he expands on -it (v 21).</p> -<p>756 He says, to the first, <span style="font-weight: bold">Indeed, he will show even greater works than these. </span>As if to say: You -are astonished and affected by the power of the Son in his healing of the sick man, but the Father -will show <span style="font-weight: bold">even greater works than these, </span>as in raising the dead, such that you will be amazed.</p> -<p>757 This passage gives rise to two difficulties. First, about his saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">he will show</span>. For the -earlier statement that the Father shows everything to the Son (5:20) refers to his eternal -generation. How, then, can he say here, <span style="font-weight: bold">he will show</span>, if the Son is coeternal with him and -eternity does not allow of a future? The second difficulty is over, <span style="font-weight: bold">such that you will be amazed</span>. -For if he intends to show something to amaze the Jews, then he will be showing it to the Son at -the same time as to them; for they could not be amazed unless they saw it. And yet the Son saw -all things from eternity with the Father.</p> -<p>758 We must say that this is explained in three ways. The first way is given by Augustine, and -in it this future showing is referred to the disciples. For it is Christ’s custom that now and then -he says that what happens to his members happens to himself, as in Matthew (25:40): “As long -as you did it to one of the least of my brethren, you did it to me.” And then the meaning is this: -You saw the Son do something great in healing the sick man, and you were amazed; but the -Father <span style="font-weight: bold">will show him even greater works than these, </span>in his members, that is, the disciples: “He -will do greater things than these,” as we read below (14:12). He then says, <span style="font-weight: bold">such that you will -be amazed, </span>for the miracles of the disciples so amazed the Jews that a great many of them were -converted to the faith, as we see in the Acts.</p> -<p>759 The second explanation, also by Augustine, refers this showing to Christ according to his -assumed nature. For in Christ there is both a divine nature and a human nature, and in each he -has life-giving power from the Father, although not in the same way. According to his divinity -he has the power to give life to souls; but according to his assumed nature, he gives life to bodies. -Hence Augustine says: “The Word gives life to souls; but the Word made flesh gives life to -bodies.” For the resurrection of Christ and the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in his flesh are -the cause of the future resurrection of bodies: “God, who is rich in mercy, has brought us to life -in Christ” (Eph 2:5); “If it is preached that Christ rose from the dead, how can some of you say -that there is no resurrection of the dead” (1 Cor 15:12). The first life-giving power he has from -eternity; and he indicated this when he said: “The ‘ Father shows him everything that he does” -(above 4:20), all of which he shows to his flesh.</p> -<p>The other life-giving power he has in time, and concerning this he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">he will show him even -greater works than these, </span>i.e., his power will be shown by the fact that he will do greater works, -by raising the dead. He will raise some of the dead here: as Lazarus, the young girl, and the -mother’s only son; and finally he will raise all on the day of judgment.</p> -<p>760 A third explanation refers this showing to Christ in his divine nature, according to the -custom of Scripture in sayfng that a thing is beginning to take place when it is beginning to be -known. For example: “All power has been given to me, in heaven and on earth” (Mt 28:18); for -although Christ had the complete fulness of power from eternity (because “whatever the Father -does, the Son does likewise”), he still speaks of this power as being given to him after the -resurrection, not because he was then receiving it for the first time, but because it was through -the glory of the resurrection that it became most known. In this interpretation, then, he says that -power is given to him insofar as he exercises it in some work. As if to say: <span style="font-weight: bold">he will show him -even greater works than these, </span>i.e., he will show by his works what has been given to him. And -this will come about when you are amazed, i.e., when the one who seems to you to be a mere -man is revealed to be a person of divine power and as God.</p> -<p>We could also take the word show as referring to an act of seeing, as was explained above [750].</p> -<p>761 Now he explains in more detail the life-giving power of the Son by indicating those greater -works which the Father will show the Son (v 21). Here we should point out that in the Old -Testament the divine power is particularly emphasized by the fact that God is the author of life: -“The Lord kills, and brings to life” (1 Sm 2:6); “1 will kill, and bring to life again” (Dt 32:39). -Now just as the Father has this power, so also does the Son; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For just as the -Father raises the dead and grants life, so the Son grants life to those to whom he wishes. </span>As -if to say: These are those greater works that the Father will show the Son, that is, he will give life -to the dead. Such works are obviously greater, for it is greater to raise the dead than for a sick -man to become well. Thus <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son grants life to those to whom he wishes, </span>i.e., by giving initial -life to the living, and by raising the dead.</p> -<p>We should not think that some are raised up by the Father and others by the Son. Rather, the -same ones who are raised and vivified by the Father, are raised and vivified by the Son also: -because just as the Father does all things through the Son, who is his power, so he also gives life -to all through the Son, who is life, as he says below: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” -(14:6).</p> -<p>The Father does not raise up and give life through the Son as through an instrument, because then -the Son would not have freedom of power. And so to exclude this he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son grants life -to those to whom he wishes, </span>i.e., it lies in the freedom of his power to grant life to whom he -wills. For the Son does not will anything different than the Father wills: for just as they are one -substance, so they have one will; hence Matthew (20:15) says: “Is it not lawful for me to do as -I will?”</p> -<p>762 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Father himself judges no one, </span>he gives the reason for what was -said above, and indicates his own power. It should be remarked that there are two expositions for -the present passages: one is given by Augustine, and the other by Hilary and Chrysostom.</p> -<p>Augustine’s explanation is this. The Lord had said that just as the Father raises the dead, so also -does the Son. But so that we do not think that this refers only to those miracles the Son performs -in raising the dead to this life, and not to the Son’s raising to eternal life, he leads them to the -deeper consideration of the resurrection to occur at the future judgment. Thus he refers explicitly -to the judgment, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Father himself judges no one.</span></p> -<p>Another explanation by Augustine, in which the same meaning is maintained, is that the earlier -statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">just as the Father raises the dead and grants life, so the Son, </span>should be referred -to the resurrection of souls, which the Son causes inasmuch as he is the Word; but the text, <span style="font-weight: bold">The -Father himself judges no one, </span>should be referred to the resurrection of bodies, which the Son -causes inasmuch as he is the Word made flesh. For the resurrection of souls is accomplished -through the person of the Father and of the Son; and for this reason he mentions the Father and -Son together, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">just as the Father raises the dead ... so the Son. </span>But the resurrection of -bodies is accomplished through the humanity of the Son, according to which he is not coeternal -with the Father. Consequently, he attributes judgment solely to the Son.</p> -<p>763 Note the wonderful variety of expressions. The Father is first presented as acting and the Son -as resting, when it says: “the Son cannot do anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father -doing” (5:19); but here, on the contrary, the Son is presented as acting and the Father as resting: -<span style="font-weight: bold">The Father himself judges no one, but he has given all judgment to the Son. </span>We can see -from this that he is speaking from different points of view at different times. At first, he was -speaking of an action which belongs to the Father and the Son; thus he says that “the Son cannot -do anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing”; but here he is speaking of an -action by which the Son, as man, judges, and the Father does not: thus he says that the Father <span style="font-weight: bold">has -given all judgment to the Son. </span>For the Father will not appear at the judgment because, in accord -with what is just, God cannot appear in his divine nature before all who are to be judged: for -since our happiness consists in the vision of God, if the wicked were to see God in his own -nature, they would be enjoying happiness. Therefore, only the Son will appear, who alone has -an assumed nature. Therefore, he alone will judge who alone will appear to all. Yet he will judge -with the authority of the Father: “He is the one appointed by God to be the judge of the living and -of the dead” (Acts 10:42); and in the Psalm (71:1) we read: “O Lord, give your judgment to the -king.”</p> -<p>764 Then when he says, so <span style="font-weight: bold">that all men may honor the Son, </span>he gives the effect which results -from the power of the Son. First, he gives the effect. Secondly, he excludes an objection (v 23b).</p> -<p>765 He says that the Father has given all judgment to the Son, according to his human nature, -because in the incarnation the Son emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, under which -form he was dishonored by men, as is said below (8:49): “I honor my Father, and you have -dishonored me.” Therefore, judgment was given to the Son in his assumed nature in order <span style="font-weight: bold">that -all men may honor the Son as they honor the Father. </span>For on that day “they will see the Son -of Man coming with great power and glory” (Lk 21:27); “They fell on their faces and -worshipped, saying: ‘Blessing and glory, and wisdom and thanks, and honor, power and strength, -to our God’” (Rv 7:11).</p> -<p>766 Someone might say: I am willing to honor the Father, but do not care about the Son. This -cannot be, because <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent -him. </span>For it is one thing to honor God precisely as God, and another to honor the Father. For -someone may well honor God as the omnipotent and immutable Creator without honoring the -Son. But no one can honor God as Father without honoring the Son; for he cannot be called -Father if he does not have a Son. But if you dishonor the Son by diminishing his power, this also -dishonors the Father; because where you give less to the Son, you are taking away from the -power of the Father.</p> -<p>767 Another explanation, given by Augustine, is this. A twofold honor is due to Christ. One, -according to his divinity, in regard to which he is owed an honor equal to that given the Father; -and with respect to this he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">that all men may honor the Son as they honor the Father. -</span>Another honor is due the Son according to his humanity, but not one equal to that given the -Father; and with respect to this he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the -Father who sent him. </span>Thus in the first case he significantly used “as”; but now, the second time, -he does not say “as,” but states absolutely that the Son should be honored: “He who rejects you, -rejects me; and he who rejects me, rejects <span style="font-weight: bold">him who </span>sent me,” as we read in Luke (10:16).</p> -<p>768 Hilary and Chrysostom give a more literal explanation, but it is only slightly different. They -explain it this way. Our Lord said above, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son grants life to those to whom he wishes. </span>Now -whoever does anything according to the free decision of his will acts because of his own -judgment. But it was stated above that “whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise” (5:19). -Therefore, the Son enjoys a free decision of his own will in all things, since he acts because of -his own judgment. Thus he immediately mentions judgment, saying that <span style="font-weight: bold">the Father himself -judges no one, </span>i.e., without or apart from the Son. Our Lord used this way of speaking below -(12:47): “I do not judge him,” i.e., I alone, “but the word that I have spoken will judge him on -the last day.” <span style="font-weight: bold">But he has given all judgment to the Son, </span>as he has given all things to him. For -as he has given him life and begotten him as living, so he has given him all judgment, i.e., -begotten him as judge: “I judge only as I hear it” (below 5:30), i.e., just as I have being (<i>esse</i>)<i> -</i>from the Father, so also judgment. The reason for this is that the Son is nothing other than the -conception of the paternal wisdom, as was said. But each one judges by the concept of his -wisdom. Hence, just as the Father does all things through the Son, so he judges all things through -him. And the fruit of this is <span style="font-weight: bold">that all men may honor the Son as they honor the Father, </span>i.e., that -they may render to him the cult of “latria” as they do the Father. The rest does not change.</p> -<p>769 Hilary calls our attention to the remarkable relationship of the passages so that the errors -concerning eternal generation can be refuted. Two heresies have arisen concerning this eternal -generation. One was that of Arius, who said that the Son is less than the Father; and this is -contrary to their equality and unity. The other was that of Sabellius, who said that that there is -no distinction of persons in the divinity; and this is contrary to their origin.</p> -<p>So, whenever he mentions the unity and equality [of the Father and Son] , he immediately also -adds their distinction as persons according to origin, and conversely. Thus, because he mentions -the origin of the persons when he says, “the Son cannot do anything of himself, but only what -he sees the Father doing” (5:19), then, so we do not think this involves inequality, he at once -adds: “for whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise.” Conversely, when he states their -equality by saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">For just as the Father raises the dead and grants life, so the Son grants -life to those to whom he wishes, </span>then, so that we do not deny that the Son has an origin and is -begotten, he adds, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Father himself judges no one, but he has given all judgment to the -Son. </span>Similarly, when he mentions the equality of the persons by saying. <span style="font-weight: bold">so that all men may -honor the Son as they honor the Father.</span> he immediately adds something about a “mission,” -which indicates an origin, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father -who sent him, </span>but not in such a way that involves a separation. Christ mentions such mission -below (8:29) in saying: “He who sent me is with me, and he has not left me alone.”</p> -<p>770 Above, our Lord showed that he had life-giving power; here he shows how someone can -share in this life coming from him. First, he tells how one can share in this life through him. -Secondly, he predicts its fulfillment (v 25).</p> -<p>771 With respect to the first, we should point out that there are four grades of life. One is found -in plants, which take nourishment, grow, reproduce, and are reproduced. Another is in animals -which only sense. Another in living things that move, that is, the perfect animals. Finally, there -is another form of life which is present in those who understand. Now among those grades of life -that exist, it is impossible that the foremost life be that found in plants, or in those with sensation, -or even in those with motion. For the first and foremost life must be that which is <i>per se, </i>not that -which is participated. This can be none other than intellectual life, for the other three forms are -common to a corporal and spiritual creature [as man]. Indeed, a body that lives is not life itself, -but one participating in life. Hence intellectual life is the first and foremost life, which is the -spiritual life, that is immediately received from the first principle of life, whence it is called the -life of wisdom. For this reason in the Scriptures life is attributed to wisdom: “He who finds me -finds life, and has salvation from the Lord” (Prv 8:35). Therefore we share life from Christ, who -is the Wisdom of God, insofar as our soul receives wisdom from him.</p> -<p>Now this intellectual life is made perfect by the true knowledge of divine Wisdom, which is -eternal life: “This is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, -whom you have sent” (below 17:3). But no one can arrive at any wisdom except by faith. Hence -it is that in the sciences, no one acquires wisdom unless he first believes what is said by his -teacher. Therefore, if we wish to acquire this life of wisdom, we must believe through faith the -things that are proposed to us by it. “He who comes to God must believe that he is and rewards -those who seek him” (Heb 11:6); “If you do not believe, you will not understand,” as we read in -another version of Isaiah (28:16).</p> -<p>772 Thus, our Lord fittingly shows that the way of obtaining life is through faith, saying, -<span style="font-weight: bold">whoever hears my voice and believes in him who sent me, possesses eternal life. </span>First, he -mentions the merit of faith. Secondly, the reward of’ faith, <span style="font-weight: bold">eternal life.</span></p> -<p>773 Concerning the merit of faith, he first indicates how faith is brought to us; and secondly, the -foundation of faith, that on which it rests.</p> -<p>Faith comes to us through the words of men: “Faith comes through hearing, and hearing through -the word of Christ” (Rom 10:17). But faith does not rest on man’s word, but on God himself: -“Abram believed God, who counted this as his justification” (Gn 15:6); “You who fear the Lord, -believe in him” (Sir 2:8). Thus we are lead to believe through the words of men, not in the man -himself who speaks, but in God, whose words he speaks: “When you heard the word we brought -you as God’s word, you did not receive it as the word of men, but, as what it really is, the word -of God” (1 Thes 2:13). Our Lord mentions these two things. First, how faith is brought to us, -when he says, whoever hears my voice [literally, word], which leads to faith. Secondly, he -mentions that on which faith rests, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">and believes in him who sent me, </span>i.e., not in me, but -in him in virtue of whom I speak.</p> -<p>This text can apply to Christ, as man, insofar as it is through Christ’s human words that men were -converted to the faith. And it can apply to Christ, as God, insofar as Christ is the Word of God. -For since Christ is the Word of God, it is clear that those who heard Christ were hearing the -Word of God, and as a consequence, were believing in God. And this is what he says: whoever -hears my word, i.e., me, the Word of God, and believes in him, i.e., the Father, whose Word I am.</p> -<p>774 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">possesses eternal life, </span>he mentions the reward of faith, and states three -things we will possess in the state of glory; but they are mentioned in reverse order. First, there -will be the resurrection from the dead. Secondly, we will have freedom from the future judgment. -Thirdly, we will enjoy everlasting life, for as we read in Matthew (c 25), the just will enter into -everlasting life. He mentions these three as belonging to the reward of faith; and the third was -mentioned first since it is desired more than the others.</p> -<p>775 So he says, whoever believes, i.e., through faith, <span style="font-weight: bold">possesses eternal life, </span>which consists in -the full vision of God. And it is fitting that one who believes on account of God certain things -that he does not see, should be brought to the full vision of these things: “These things are written -that you may believe ... and that believing you may have life in his name” (below 20:31).</p> -<p>776 He mentions the second when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and he will not encounter judgment. </span>But the -Apostle says something which contradicts this: “We must all appear before the judgment seat of -Christ” (2 Cor 5:10), even the apostles. Therefore, even one who does believe will encounter -judgment. I answer that there are two kinds of judgment. One is a judgment of condemnation, -and no one encounters that judgment if he believes in God with a faith that is united with love -[ a “formed faith”]. We read about this judgment: “Do not enter into judgment with your servant, -for no living man is just in your sight”; and it was said above (3:18): “Whoever believes is not -judged.” There is also a judgment of separation and examination; and, as the Apostle says, all -must present themselves before the tribunal of Christ for this judgment. Of this judgment we -read: “Judge me, O God, and distinguish my cause from those people who are not holy” (Ps +<p>Therefore, it is said that the Father <span style= +"font-weight: bold">shows</span> all that he does to the Son, +inasmuch as he gives the Son a knowledge of all of his works. For +it is in this way that a master is said to show something to his +disciple, inasmuch as he gives him a knowledge of the things he +makes. Hence, according to Augustine, for the Father to show +anything to the Son is nothing more than for the Father to beget or +generate the Son. And for the Son to see what the Father does is +nothing more than for the Son to receive his being (<i>esse</i>) +and nature from the Father.</p> +<p>Nevertheless, this showing can be considered similar to seeing +insofar as the Son is the brightness of the paternal vision, as we +read in Hebrews (1:3): for the Father, seeing and understanding +himself, conceives the Son, who is the concept of this vision. +Again, it can be considered similar to hearing insofar as the Son +proceeds from the Father as the Word. As if to say: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">The Father shows him everything,</span> insofar +he he generates him as the brightness and concept of his own +wisdom, and as the Word. Thus the words, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">The Father shows,</span> refer to what was said +before: <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son cannot do anything +of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing.</span> And the +word, everything, refers to, <span style="font-weight: bold">For +whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise.</span></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>20b “Indeed, he will show him even greater works than +these, such that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father +raises the dead and grants life, so the Son grants life to those to +whom he wishes. 22 The Father himself judges no one, but he has +given all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all men may honor the Son +as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not +honor the Father who sent him. 24 Amen, amen, I say to you, that +whoever hears my voice and believes in him who sent me, possesses +eternal life; and he will not encounter judgment, but has passed +from death to life. 25 Amen, amen, I say to you, the hour is +coming, and is now here, when the dead shall hear the voice of the +Son of God; and those who hear it will live.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>755 Having pointed out the power of the Son in general, he now +shows it in more detail. First, the Lord discloses his life-giving +power. Secondly, he clarifies what seemed obscure in what was said +before (v 26). As to the first he does two things. First, he shows +that the Son has life-giving power. Secondly, he teaches how life +is received from the Son (v 24). Concerning the first he does three +things. First, he presents the life-giving power of the Son. +Secondly, he gives a reason for what he says (v 22). Thirdly, he +shows the effect of this (v 23). With respect to the first he does +two things. First, he sets forth this life-giving power in general. +Secondly, he expands on it (v 21).</p> +<p>756 He says, to the first, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Indeed, he will show even greater works than +these.</span> As if to say: You are astonished and affected by the +power of the Son in his healing of the sick man, but the Father +will show <span style="font-weight: bold">even greater works than +these,</span> as in raising the dead, such that you will be +amazed.</p> +<p>757 This passage gives rise to two difficulties. First, about +his saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">he will show</span>. +For the earlier statement that the Father shows everything to the +Son (5:20) refers to his eternal generation. How, then, can he say +here, <span style="font-weight: bold">he will show</span>, if the +Son is coeternal with him and eternity does not allow of a future? +The second difficulty is over, <span style="font-weight: bold">such +that you will be amazed</span>. For if he intends to show something +to amaze the Jews, then he will be showing it to the Son at the +same time as to them; for they could not be amazed unless they saw +it. And yet the Son saw all things from eternity with the +Father.</p> +<p>758 We must say that this is explained in three ways. The first +way is given by Augustine, and in it this future showing is +referred to the disciples. For it is Christ’s custom that now +and then he says that what happens to his members happens to +himself, as in Matthew (25:40): “As long as you did it to one +of the least of my brethren, you did it to me.” And then the +meaning is this: You saw the Son do something great in healing the +sick man, and you were amazed; but the Father <span style= +"font-weight: bold">will show him even greater works than +these,</span> in his members, that is, the disciples: “He +will do greater things than these,” as we read below (14:12). +He then says, <span style="font-weight: bold">such that you will be +amazed,</span> for the miracles of the disciples so amazed the Jews +that a great many of them were converted to the faith, as we see in +the Acts.</p> +<p>759 The second explanation, also by Augustine, refers this +showing to Christ according to his assumed nature. For in Christ +there is both a divine nature and a human nature, and in each he +has life-giving power from the Father, although not in the same +way. According to his divinity he has the power to give life to +souls; but according to his assumed nature, he gives life to +bodies. Hence Augustine says: “The Word gives life to souls; +but the Word made flesh gives life to bodies.” For the +resurrection of Christ and the mysteries which Christ fulfilled in +his flesh are the cause of the future resurrection of bodies: +“God, who is rich in mercy, has brought us to life in +Christ” (Eph 2:5); “If it is preached that Christ rose +from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no +resurrection of the dead” (1 Cor 15:12). The first +life-giving power he has from eternity; and he indicated this when +he said: “The ‘ Father shows him everything that he +does” (above 4:20), all of which he shows to his flesh.</p> +<p>The other life-giving power he has in time, and concerning this +he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">he will show him even +greater works than these,</span> i.e., his power will be shown by +the fact that he will do greater works, by raising the dead. He +will raise some of the dead here: as Lazarus, the young girl, and +the mother’s only son; and finally he will raise all on the +day of judgment.</p> +<p>760 A third explanation refers this showing to Christ in his +divine nature, according to the custom of Scripture in sayfng that +a thing is beginning to take place when it is beginning to be +known. For example: “All power has been given to me, in +heaven and on earth” (Mt 28:18); for although Christ had the +complete fulness of power from eternity (because “whatever +the Father does, the Son does likewise”), he still speaks of +this power as being given to him after the resurrection, not +because he was then receiving it for the first time, but because it +was through the glory of the resurrection that it became most +known. In this interpretation, then, he says that power is given to +him insofar as he exercises it in some work. As if to say: +<span style="font-weight: bold">he will show him even greater works +than these,</span> i.e., he will show by his works what has been +given to him. And this will come about when you are amazed, i.e., +when the one who seems to you to be a mere man is revealed to be a +person of divine power and as God.</p> +<p>We could also take the word show as referring to an act of +seeing, as was explained above [750].</p> +<p>761 Now he explains in more detail the life-giving power of the +Son by indicating those greater works which the Father will show +the Son (v 21). Here we should point out that in the Old Testament +the divine power is particularly emphasized by the fact that God is +the author of life: “The Lord kills, and brings to +life” (1 Sm 2:6); “1 will kill, and bring to life +again” (Dt 32:39). Now just as the Father has this power, so +also does the Son; hence he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">For just as the Father raises the dead and +grants life, so the Son grants life to those to whom he +wishes.</span> As if to say: These are those greater works that the +Father will show the Son, that is, he will give life to the dead. +Such works are obviously greater, for it is greater to raise the +dead than for a sick man to become well. Thus <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son grants life to those to whom he +wishes,</span> i.e., by giving initial life to the living, and by +raising the dead.</p> +<p>We should not think that some are raised up by the Father and +others by the Son. Rather, the same ones who are raised and +vivified by the Father, are raised and vivified by the Son also: +because just as the Father does all things through the Son, who is +his power, so he also gives life to all through the Son, who is +life, as he says below: “I am the way, and the truth, and the +life” (14:6).</p> +<p>The Father does not raise up and give life through the Son as +through an instrument, because then the Son would not have freedom +of power. And so to exclude this he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son grants life to those to whom he +wishes,</span> i.e., it lies in the freedom of his power to grant +life to whom he wills. For the Son does not will anything different +than the Father wills: for just as they are one substance, so they +have one will; hence Matthew (20:15) says: “Is it not lawful +for me to do as I will?”</p> +<p>762 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The +Father himself judges no one,</span> he gives the reason for what +was said above, and indicates his own power. It should be remarked +that there are two expositions for the present passages: one is +given by Augustine, and the other by Hilary and Chrysostom.</p> +<p>Augustine’s explanation is this. The Lord had said that +just as the Father raises the dead, so also does the Son. But so +that we do not think that this refers only to those miracles the +Son performs in raising the dead to this life, and not to the +Son’s raising to eternal life, he leads them to the deeper +consideration of the resurrection to occur at the future judgment. +Thus he refers explicitly to the judgment, saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">The Father himself judges no one.</span></p> +<p>Another explanation by Augustine, in which the same meaning is +maintained, is that the earlier statement, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">just as the Father raises the dead and grants +life, so the Son,</span> should be referred to the resurrection of +souls, which the Son causes inasmuch as he is the Word; but the +text, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Father himself judges no +one,</span> should be referred to the resurrection of bodies, which +the Son causes inasmuch as he is the Word made flesh. For the +resurrection of souls is accomplished through the person of the +Father and of the Son; and for this reason he mentions the Father +and Son together, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">just as +the Father raises the dead ... so the Son.</span> But the +resurrection of bodies is accomplished through the humanity of the +Son, according to which he is not coeternal with the Father. +Consequently, he attributes judgment solely to the Son.</p> +<p>763 Note the wonderful variety of expressions. The Father is +first presented as acting and the Son as resting, when it says: +“the Son cannot do anything of himself, but only what he sees +the Father doing” (5:19); but here, on the contrary, the Son +is presented as acting and the Father as resting: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">The Father himself judges no one, but he has +given all judgment to the Son.</span> We can see from this that he +is speaking from different points of view at different times. At +first, he was speaking of an action which belongs to the Father and +the Son; thus he says that “the Son cannot do anything of +himself, but only what he sees the Father doing”; but here he +is speaking of an action by which the Son, as man, judges, and the +Father does not: thus he says that the Father <span style= +"font-weight: bold">has given all judgment to the Son.</span> For +the Father will not appear at the judgment because, in accord with +what is just, God cannot appear in his divine nature before all who +are to be judged: for since our happiness consists in the vision of +God, if the wicked were to see God in his own nature, they would be +enjoying happiness. Therefore, only the Son will appear, who alone +has an assumed nature. Therefore, he alone will judge who alone +will appear to all. Yet he will judge with the authority of the +Father: “He is the one appointed by God to be the judge of +the living and of the dead” (Acts 10:42); and in the Psalm +(71:1) we read: “O Lord, give your judgment to the +king.”</p> +<p>764 Then when he says, so <span style="font-weight: bold">that +all men may honor the Son,</span> he gives the effect which results +from the power of the Son. First, he gives the effect. Secondly, he +excludes an objection (v 23b).</p> +<p>765 He says that the Father has given all judgment to the Son, +according to his human nature, because in the incarnation the Son +emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, under which form he +was dishonored by men, as is said below (8:49): “I honor my +Father, and you have dishonored me.” Therefore, judgment was +given to the Son in his assumed nature in order <span style= +"font-weight: bold">that all men may honor the Son as they honor +the Father.</span> For on that day “they will see the Son of +Man coming with great power and glory” (Lk 21:27); +“They fell on their faces and worshipped, saying: +‘Blessing and glory, and wisdom and thanks, and honor, power +and strength, to our God’” (Rv 7:11).</p> +<p>766 Someone might say: I am willing to honor the Father, but do +not care about the Son. This cannot be, because <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor +the Father who sent him.</span> For it is one thing to honor God +precisely as God, and another to honor the Father. For someone may +well honor God as the omnipotent and immutable Creator without +honoring the Son. But no one can honor God as Father without +honoring the Son; for he cannot be called Father if he does not +have a Son. But if you dishonor the Son by diminishing his power, +this also dishonors the Father; because where you give less to the +Son, you are taking away from the power of the Father.</p> +<p>767 Another explanation, given by Augustine, is this. A twofold +honor is due to Christ. One, according to his divinity, in regard +to which he is owed an honor equal to that given the Father; and +with respect to this he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">that +all men may honor the Son as they honor the Father.</span> Another +honor is due the Son according to his humanity, but not one equal +to that given the Father; and with respect to this he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever does not honor the Son does +not honor the Father who sent him.</span> Thus in the first case he +significantly used “as”; but now, the second time, he +does not say “as,” but states absolutely that the Son +should be honored: “He who rejects you, rejects me; and he +who rejects me, rejects <span style="font-weight: bold">him +who</span> sent me,” as we read in Luke (10:16).</p> +<p>768 Hilary and Chrysostom give a more literal explanation, but +it is only slightly different. They explain it this way. Our Lord +said above, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son grants life to +those to whom he wishes.</span> Now whoever does anything according +to the free decision of his will acts because of his own judgment. +But it was stated above that “whatever the Father does, the +Son does likewise” (5:19). Therefore, the Son enjoys a free +decision of his own will in all things, since he acts because of +his own judgment. Thus he immediately mentions judgment, saying +that <span style="font-weight: bold">the Father himself judges no +one,</span> i.e., without or apart from the Son. Our Lord used this +way of speaking below (12:47): “I do not judge him,” +i.e., I alone, “but the word that I have spoken will judge +him on the last day.” <span style="font-weight: bold">But he +has given all judgment to the Son,</span> as he has given all +things to him. For as he has given him life and begotten him as +living, so he has given him all judgment, i.e., begotten him as +judge: “I judge only as I hear it” (below 5:30), i.e., +just as I have being (<i>esse</i>)from the Father, so also +judgment. The reason for this is that the Son is nothing other than +the conception of the paternal wisdom, as was said. But each one +judges by the concept of his wisdom. Hence, just as the Father does +all things through the Son, so he judges all things through him. +And the fruit of this is <span style="font-weight: bold">that all +men may honor the Son as they honor the Father,</span> i.e., that +they may render to him the cult of “latria” as they do +the Father. The rest does not change.</p> +<p>769 Hilary calls our attention to the remarkable relationship of +the passages so that the errors concerning eternal generation can +be refuted. Two heresies have arisen concerning this eternal +generation. One was that of Arius, who said that the Son is less +than the Father; and this is contrary to their equality and unity. +The other was that of Sabellius, who said that that there is no +distinction of persons in the divinity; and this is contrary to +their origin.</p> +<p>So, whenever he mentions the unity and equality [of the Father +and Son] , he immediately also adds their distinction as persons +according to origin, and conversely. Thus, because he mentions the +origin of the persons when he says, “the Son cannot do +anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing” +(5:19), then, so we do not think this involves inequality, he at +once adds: “for whatever the Father does, the Son does +likewise.” Conversely, when he states their equality by +saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">For just as the Father +raises the dead and grants life, so the Son grants life to those to +whom he wishes,</span> then, so that we do not deny that the Son +has an origin and is begotten, he adds, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Father himself judges no one, but he has +given all judgment to the Son.</span> Similarly, when he mentions +the equality of the persons by saying. <span style= +"font-weight: bold">so that all men may honor the Son as they honor +the Father.</span> he immediately adds something about a +“mission,” which indicates an origin, saying: +<span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever does not honor the Son does +not honor the Father who sent him,</span> but not in such a way +that involves a separation. Christ mentions such mission below +(8:29) in saying: “He who sent me is with me, and he has not +left me alone.”</p> +<p>770 Above, our Lord showed that he had life-giving power; here +he shows how someone can share in this life coming from him. First, +he tells how one can share in this life through him. Secondly, he +predicts its fulfillment (v 25).</p> +<p>771 With respect to the first, we should point out that there +are four grades of life. One is found in plants, which take +nourishment, grow, reproduce, and are reproduced. Another is in +animals which only sense. Another in living things that move, that +is, the perfect animals. Finally, there is another form of life +which is present in those who understand. Now among those grades of +life that exist, it is impossible that the foremost life be that +found in plants, or in those with sensation, or even in those with +motion. For the first and foremost life must be that which is +<i>per se,</i> not that which is participated. This can be none +other than intellectual life, for the other three forms are common +to a corporal and spiritual creature [as man]. Indeed, a body that +lives is not life itself, but one participating in life. Hence +intellectual life is the first and foremost life, which is the +spiritual life, that is immediately received from the first +principle of life, whence it is called the life of wisdom. For this +reason in the Scriptures life is attributed to wisdom: “He +who finds me finds life, and has salvation from the Lord” +(Prv 8:35). Therefore we share life from Christ, who is the Wisdom +of God, insofar as our soul receives wisdom from him.</p> +<p>Now this intellectual life is made perfect by the true knowledge +of divine Wisdom, which is eternal life: “This is eternal +life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, +whom you have sent” (below 17:3). But no one can arrive at +any wisdom except by faith. Hence it is that in the sciences, no +one acquires wisdom unless he first believes what is said by his +teacher. Therefore, if we wish to acquire this life of wisdom, we +must believe through faith the things that are proposed to us by +it. “He who comes to God must believe that he is and rewards +those who seek him” (Heb 11:6); “If you do not believe, +you will not understand,” as we read in another version of +Isaiah (28:16).</p> +<p>772 Thus, our Lord fittingly shows that the way of obtaining +life is through faith, saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">whoever hears my voice and believes in him who +sent me, possesses eternal life.</span> First, he mentions the +merit of faith. Secondly, the reward of’ faith, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">eternal life.</span></p> +<p>773 Concerning the merit of faith, he first indicates how faith +is brought to us; and secondly, the foundation of faith, that on +which it rests.</p> +<p>Faith comes to us through the words of men: “Faith comes +through hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ” (Rom +10:17). But faith does not rest on man’s word, but on God +himself: “Abram believed God, who counted this as his +justification” (Gn 15:6); “You who fear the Lord, +believe in him” (Sir 2:8). Thus we are lead to believe +through the words of men, not in the man himself who speaks, but in +God, whose words he speaks: “When you heard the word we +brought you as God’s word, you did not receive it as the word +of men, but, as what it really is, the word of God” (1 Thes +2:13). Our Lord mentions these two things. First, how faith is +brought to us, when he says, whoever hears my voice [literally, +word], which leads to faith. Secondly, he mentions that on which +faith rests, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">and believes +in him who sent me,</span> i.e., not in me, but in him in virtue of +whom I speak.</p> +<p>This text can apply to Christ, as man, insofar as it is through +Christ’s human words that men were converted to the faith. +And it can apply to Christ, as God, insofar as Christ is the Word +of God. For since Christ is the Word of God, it is clear that those +who heard Christ were hearing the Word of God, and as a +consequence, were believing in God. And this is what he says: +whoever hears my word, i.e., me, the Word of God, and believes in +him, i.e., the Father, whose Word I am.</p> +<p>774 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">possesses +eternal life,</span> he mentions the reward of faith, and states +three things we will possess in the state of glory; but they are +mentioned in reverse order. First, there will be the resurrection +from the dead. Secondly, we will have freedom from the future +judgment. Thirdly, we will enjoy everlasting life, for as we read +in Matthew (c 25), the just will enter into everlasting life. He +mentions these three as belonging to the reward of faith; and the +third was mentioned first since it is desired more than the +others.</p> +<p>775 So he says, whoever believes, i.e., through faith, +<span style="font-weight: bold">possesses eternal life,</span> +which consists in the full vision of God. And it is fitting that +one who believes on account of God certain things that he does not +see, should be brought to the full vision of these things: +“These things are written that you may believe ... and that +believing you may have life in his name” (below 20:31).</p> +<p>776 He mentions the second when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and he will not encounter judgment.</span> But +the Apostle says something which contradicts this: “We must +all appear before the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Cor 5:10), +even the apostles. Therefore, even one who does believe will +encounter judgment. I answer that there are two kinds of judgment. +One is a judgment of condemnation, and no one encounters that +judgment if he believes in God with a faith that is united with +love [ a “formed faith”]. We read about this judgment: +“Do not enter into judgment with your servant, for no living +man is just in your sight”; and it was said above (3:18): +“Whoever believes is not judged.” There is also a +judgment of separation and examination; and, as the Apostle says, +all must present themselves before the tribunal of Christ for this +judgment. Of this judgment we read: “Judge me, O God, and +distinguish my cause from those people who are not holy” (Ps 42:1).</p> -<p>777 Thirdly, he mentions a reward when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but has passed from death to life, </span>or “will -pass,” as another version says. This statement can be explained in two ways. First, it can refer -to the resurrection of the soul. In this case the obvious meaning is that he is saying: Through faith -we attain not only to eternal life and freedom from judgment, but also to the forgiveness of our -sins as well. Hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but has passed, </span>from unbelief to belief, from injustice to justice: -“We know that we have passed from death to life” (1 Jn 3:14).</p> -<p>Secondly, this statement can be explained as referring to the resurrection of the body. Then it is -an elaboration of the phrase, <span style="font-weight: bold">possesses eternal life</span>. For some might think from what was said, -that whoever believes in God will never die, but live forever. But this is impossible, because all -men must pay the debt incurred by the. first sin, according to: “Where is the man who lives, and -will not see death?” (Ps 88:49). Consequently, we should not think that one who believes has -eternal life in such a way as never to die; rather, he will pass from thi’s life, through death, to life, -i.e., through the death of the body he will be revived to eternal life.</p> -<p>Or, “will pass,” might refer to the cause [of one’s resurrection] for when a person believes, he -already has the merit for a glorious resurrection: “Your dead will live, your slain will rise” (Is -26:19). And then, once released from the death of the old man, we will receive the life of the new -man, that is, Christ.</p> -<p>778 <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to you... </span>Since some might doubt if any would pass from death to life, -our Lord predicts that this will happen, saying: I say that he [who believes] “will pass from death -to life”; and I say it before it actually occurs. And this is what he states, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, -I say to you, the hour is coming, </span>not determined by a necessity of fate, but by God’s decree: “It -is the last hour” (1 Jn 2:18). And so that we do not think that it is far off, he adds, <span style="font-weight: bold">and is now -here </span>“it is now the time for us to rise froin sleep” (Rom 13:11)—i.e., the hour is now here <span style="font-weight: bold">when -the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear it will live.</span></p> -<p>779 This can be explained in two ways. In one way as referring to the resurrection of the body, -and so it is said that <span style="font-weight: bold">the hour is coming, and is now here, </span>as if he had said: It is true that -eventually all will rise, but even now is the hour when some, whom the Lord was about to -resuscitate, <span style="font-weight: bold">shall hear the voice of the Son of God. </span>This is the way Lazarus heard it when it was -said to him, “Come forth,” as we read below (11:43); and in this way the daughter of the leader -of the synagogue heard it (Mt 9:18); and the widow’s son (Lk 7:12). Therefore, he says -significantly, <span style="font-weight: bold">and is now here, </span>because through me the dead already are beginning to be raised.</p> -<p>Another explanation is given by Augustine, according to which <span style="font-weight: bold">and is now here </span>refers to the -resurrection of the soul. For as was said above, resurrection is of two kinds: the resurrection of -bodies, which will happen in the future; this does not take place now, but will occur at the future -judgment. The other is the resurrection of souls from the death of unbelief to the life of faith, and -from the life of injustice to that of justice; and this is now here. Hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the hour is -coming, and is now here, when the dead, </span>i.e., unbelievers and sinners, <span style="font-weight: bold">shall hear the voice of -the Son of God; and those who hear it will live, </span>according to the true faith.</p> -<p>780 This passage seems to imply two strange occurrences. One, when he says that the dead will -hear. The other, when he adds that it is through hearing that they will come to life again, as -though hearing comes before life, whereas hearing is a certain function of life. However, if we -refer this to the resurrection, it is true that the dead will hear, i.e., obey the voice of the Son of -God. For the voice expresses the interior concept. Now all nature obeys the slightest command -of the divine will: “He calls into existence what does not exist” (Rom 4:17). According to this, -then, wood, stones, all things, not just the dry bones but also the dust of dead bodies, <span style="font-weight: bold">shall hear -the voice of the Son of God </span>so far as they obey his slightest will. And this belongs to Christ, not -insofar as he is the Son of Man, but insofar as he is the Son of God, because all things obey the -Word of God. And so he significantly says, <span style="font-weight: bold">of the Son of God; </span>“What kind of man is this, for -the sea and winds obey him?” (Mt 8:27).</p> -<p>If this statement (25b) is understood as referring to the resurrection of souls, then the reason for -it is this: the voice of the Son of God has a life-giving power, that voice by which he moves the -hearts of the faithful interiorly by inspiration, or exteriorly by his preaching and that of others: -“The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (below 6:64). And so he gives life to the -dead when he justifies the wicked. And since hearing is the way to life, either of nature through -obedience, namely, by repairing nature, or the hearing of faith by repairing life and justice, he -therefore says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and those who hear it, </span>by obedience as to the resurrection of the body, or by faith -as to the resurrection of souls, will live, in the body in eternal life, and injustice in the life of -grace.</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>26 “Indeed, just as the Father possesses life in himself, so he has given it to the Son to have life -in himself. 27 And he [the Father] gave him the power to pass judgment, because he is the Son -of Man. 28 Do not be surprised at this, since the hour is coming when all those burried in tombs -will hear the voice of the Son of God. 29 And those who have done well will come forth to a -resurrection of life; those who have done evil will come forth to a resurrection of judgment [i.e., -condemnation]. 30 I cannot do anything of myself, but I judge only as I hear it; and my judgment -is just, because I am not seeking my own will, but the will of him who sent me.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>781 Above, our Lord showed that he had the power to give life and to judge; and he explained -each by its effect. Here he shows how each of these powers belongs to him. First, he shows this -with respect to his life-giving power. Secondly, with respect to his power to judge (v 27).</p> -<p>782 So he says, first: I say that as the Father raises the dead, so I do also; and anyone who hears -my word has eternal life. And I possess this because, <span style="font-weight: bold">just as the Father possesses life in -himself, so he has given it to the Son to have life in himself.</span></p> -<p>Apropos of this, we should note that some who live do not have life in themselves: as Paul, “I -am living by faith in the Son of God” (Gal 2:20); and again in the same place: “it is not I who -now live, but Christ lives in me.” Thus he lived, yet not in himself, but in another through whom -he lived: as a body lives, although it does not have life in itself, but in a soul through which it -lives. So that has life in itself which has an essential, non-participated life, i.e., that which is itself -life. Now in every genus of things, that which is something through its essence is the cause of -those things that are it by participation, as fire is the cause of all things afire. And so, that which -is life through its essence, is the cause and principle of all life in living things. Accordingly, if -something is to be a principle of life, it must be life through its essence. And so our Lord fittingly -shows that he is the principle of all life by saying that he has life in himself, i.e., through his -essence, when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">just as the Father possesses life in himself, </span>i.e., as he is living through -his essence, so does the Son. Therefore, as the Father is the cause of life, so also is his Son.</p> -<p>Further, he shows the equality of the Son to the Father when he says, as <span style="font-weight: bold">the Father possesses -life in himself; </span>and he shows their distinction when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">he has given it to the Son</span>. For the -Father and the Son are equal in life; but they are distinct, because the Father gives, and the Son -receives. However, we should not understand this to mean that the Son receives life from the -Father as if the Son first existed without having life, as in lower things a first matter, already -existing, receives a form, and as a subject receives accidents: because in the Son there is nothing -that exists prior to the reception of life. For as Hilary says: “the Son has nothing unless it is -begotten,” i.e., nothing but what he receives through his birth. And since the Father is life itself, -the meaning of, <span style="font-weight: bold">he has given it to the Son to have life in himself, </span>is that the Father produced -the Son as living. As if one were to say: the mind gives life to the word, not as though the word -existed and then receives life, but because the mind produces the word in the same life by which -it lives.</p> -<p>783 According to Hilary, this passage destroys three heresies. First, that of the Arians, who said -that the Son is inferior to the Father. They were forced by what was stated earlier, that is, “For -whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise” (5:19), to say that the Son is equal to the Father -in power; but they still denied that the Son is equal to the Father in nature. But now, this too is -refuted by this statement, namely, <span style="font-weight: bold">just as the Father possesses life in himself, so he has given -it to the Son to have life in himself. </span>For since life pertains to the nature, if the Son has life in -himself as does the Father, it is clear that he has in himself, by his very origin, a nature indivisible -froin and equal to that ofthe Father.</p> -<p>The second error is also Arian: their denial that the Son is coeternal with the Father, when they -say that the Son began to exist in time. This is destroyed when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">the Son has life in -himself. </span>For in all living things whose generation occurs in time, it is always possible to find -something that at some time or other was not living. But in the Son, whatever is, is life itself. -Consequently, he so received life itself that he has life in himself, so as always to have been -living.</p> -<p>Thirdly, by saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">he has given, </span>he destroys the error of Sabellius, who denied the distinction -of persons. For if the Father gave life to the Son, it is obvious that the Father, who gave it, is -other than the Son, who received it.</p> -<p>784 Then (v 27), he makes it clear that he has the power to judge. First, he reveals his judiciary -power. Secondly, he gives a reason for what he has said (v 30). As to the first he does two things. -First, he indicates the origin of his judiciary power. Secondly, he shows that his judgment is just -(v 29).</p> -<p>785 With regard to the first, we should note that his statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">he [the Father] gave him the -power, </span>can be understood in two ways. One way is that of Augustine; the other is that of -Chrysostom.</p> -<p>786 If we understand it as Chrysostom does, then this section is divided into two parts. First, he -reveals the origin of his judiciary power. Secondly, he settles a difficulty (v 27b).</p> -<p>Chrysostom punctuates this section in the following way. <span style="font-weight: bold">He gave him the power to pass -judgment. </span>And then a new sentence begins: <span style="font-weight: bold">Because he is the Son of Man, do not be -surprised at this. </span>The reason for this punctuation is that Paul of Samosata, an early heretic, who -like Photius said that Christ was only a man and took his origin from the Virgin, punctuated it -as: <span style="font-weight: bold">He gave him the power to pass judghnent because he is the Son of Man. </span>And then he -began a new sentence: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this, since the hour is coming. </span>It was as if he -thought that it was necessary for judiciary power to be given to Christ because he is the Son of -Man, that is, a mere man, who, of himself, cannot judge men. And so, if Christ is to judge others, -he must be given the power to judge.</p> -<p>But this, according to Chrysostom, cannot stand, because it is not at all in agreement with what -is stated. For if it is because he is a man that he receives judiciary power, then for the same -reason, since it would belong to every man to have judiciary power in virtue of his human nature, -it would not belong to Christ any more than to other men. So we should not understand it this -way. Rather, we should say that because Christ is the ineffable Son of God, he is on that account -also judge. And this is what he says: The Father not only give him the power to give life, but <span style="font-weight: bold">also -he gave him the power, </span>through eternal <span style="font-weight: bold">generation, to pass judgment, </span>just as he gave him, -through eternal generation, to have life in himself: “He is the one appointed by God to be the -judge of the living and of the dead,” as we read in Acts (10:42).</p> -<p>He settles a difficulty when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this. </span>First, he mentions the -difficulty. Secondly, he clears it up.</p> -<p>787 The difficulty arose in the minds of the Jews and they were surprised because while they -thought that Christ was no more than a man, he was saying things about himself that surpassed -man and even the angels. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this, </span>that is, that I have said that -the Son gives life to the dead and has the power to judge precisely <span style="font-weight: bold">because he is the Son of -Man. </span>They were surprised because, although they thought he was only a man, they saw that he -accomplished divine effects: “What kind of man is this, for the sea and winds obey him?” (Mt -8:27). And he gives a reason why they should not be surprised, which is, because he who is the -Son of Man is the Son of God. Although, as Chrysostom says, is it not said explicitly that the Son -of Man is the Son of God, our Lord lays down the premises from which this statement necessarily -follows: just as we notice that those who use syllogisms in their teaching do not express their -main conclusion, but only that from which it follows with necessity. So our Lord does not say -that he is the Son of God, but that the Son of Man is such that at his voice all the dead will rise. -From this it necessarily follows that he is the Son of God: for it is a proper effect of God to raise -the dead. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this, since the hour is coming when all those -burried in tombs will hear the voice of the Son of God. </span>But he does not say of this hour, as -he said above, “and is now here” (5:25). Again, here he says, all, which he did not say above: -because at the first resurrection he raised only some, as Lazarus, the widow’s son and the young -girl; but at the future resurrection, at the time of judgment, <span style="font-weight: bold">all will hear the voice of the Son of -God, </span>and will rise. “I will open your graves, and lead you out of your tombs” (Ez 37:12).</p> -<p>788 Augustine punctuates this passage in the following way. <span style="font-weight: bold">And he gave him the power to -pass judgment because he is the Son of Man. </span>And then a new sentence follows: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be -surprised at this. </span>In this interpretation there are two parts. The first concerns the power to judge -granted to the Son of Man. In the second, the granting of an even greater power is made clear, -at <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this.</span></p> -<p>789 As to the first we should note that, according to the mind of Augustine, he spoke above of -the resurrection of souls, which is accomplished through the Son of God, but here he is speaking -of the resurrection of bodies, which is accomplished through the Son of Man. And because the -general resurrection of bodies will take place at the time of judgment, he mentions the judgment -first, in saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">And he [the Father] gave him, </span>i.e., Christ, <span style="font-weight: bold">the power to pass Judgment, </span>and -this, <span style="font-weight: bold">because he is the Son of Man, </span>i.e., according to his human nature. Thus it is also after the -resurrection that he says in Matthew (28:18): “All power has been given to me, in heaven and -on earth.”</p> -<p>There are three reasons why judiciary power has been given to Christ as man. First, in order that -he might be seen by all: for it is necessary that a judge be seen by all who are to be judged. Now -both the good and the wicked will be judged. And the good will see Christ in his divinity and in -his humanity; while the wicked will not be able to see him in his divinity, because this vision is -the happiness of the saints and is seedonly by the pure in heart: “Happy are the pure in heart, for -they will see God” (Mt 5:8). And so, in order that Christ can be seen at the judgment not only by -the good, but also by the wicked, he will judge in human form: “Every eye will see him, and all -who pierced him” (Rv 1:7).</p> -<p>Secondly, the power to judge was given to Christ as man because by the self-abasement of his -passion he merited the glory of an exaltation. Thus, just as he who died arose, so that [human] -form which was judged, will judge, and he who stood before a human judge will preside at the -judgment of men. He who was falsely found guilty will condemn the truly guilty, as Augustine -remarks in his work, <i>The Sayings of the Lord. </i>“Your cause has been judged as that of the wicked; -but cause and judgment you will recover” (Jb 3 6.17).</p> -<p>Thirdly, Christas man was given judiciary power to suggest the compassion of the judge. For it -is very terrifying for a man to be judged by God: “It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the -living God” (Heb 10:31); but it produces confidence for a man to have another man as his judge. -Accordingly, so you can experience the compassion of your judge, you will have a man as judge: -“We do not have a high priest who cannot have compassion on our weakness” (Heb 4:15).</p> -<p>Thus, <span style="font-weight: bold">he gave him</span>, Christ, <span style="font-weight: bold">the power to pass judgment because he is the Son of Man.</span></p> -<p>790 <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this, </span>for he has given him a greater power, that is, the power to raise -the dead. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">since the hour is coming, </span>that is, the last hour at the end of the world: -“The time has come, the day of slaughter is near” (Ez 7:7), <span style="font-weight: bold">when all those burried in tombs will -hear the voice of the Son of God. </span>Above he did not say “all,” because there he was speaking -of the spiritual resurrection, in which all did not rise at his first coming, for we read: “All do not -have faith” (2 Thes 3:2). But here he is speaking of the resurrection of the body, and all will rise -in this way, as we read in 1 Corinthians (15:20). He adds, <span style="font-weight: bold">those burried in tombs, </span>which he had -not mentioned above, because only bodies, not souls, are in tombs, and it is the resurrection of -bodies that will then take place.</p> -<p><span style="font-weight: bold">All those burried in tombs will hear the voice of the Son of God. </span>This voice will be a sense -perceptible sign of the Son of God, at whose sound all will be raised: “The Lord will come with -the cry of the archangel and with the trumpet of God” (1 Thes 4:15); we find the same in 1 -Corinthians (15:52) and in Matthew (25:6): “There was a cry at midnight.” This voice will derive -its power from the divinity of Christ: “He will make his voice a powerful voice,” as the Psalm -(67:34) says.</p> -<p>791 As we saw, Augustine says that the resurrection of the body will be accomplished through -the Word made flesh, but the resurrection of the soul is accomplished through the Word. One -may wonder how to understand this: whether we are talking about a first cause or a meritorious -cause. If we are referring to a first cause, then it is clear that the divinity of Christ is the cause of -the corporal and spiritual resurrection, i.e., of the resurrection of bodies and of souls, according -to: “I will kill, and I will bring to life again” (Dt 32:39). But if we are referring to a meritorious -cause, then it is the humanity of Christ which is the cause of both resurrections: because through -the mysteries accomplished in the flesh of Christ we are restored not only to an incorruptible life -in our bodies, but also to a spiritual life in our souls: “He was put to death on account of our sins, -and he rose for our justification” (Rom 4:25). Accordingly, what Augustine says does not seem -to be true.</p> -<p>I answer that Augustine is speaking of the exemplary cause and of that cause by which that which -is brought to life is made conformable to that which brings it to life: for everything that lives -through another is conformed to that through which it lives. Now the resurrection of souls does -not consist in souls being conformed to the humanity of Christ, but to the Word, because the life -of the soul is through the Word alone; and so he says that the resurrection of souls takes place -through the Word. But the resurrection of the body will consist in our bodies being conformed -to the body of Christ through the life of glory, that is, through the glory of our bodies, according -to: “He will change our lowly body so it is like his glorious body” (Phil 3:2 1). And it is from this -point of view that he says that the resurrection of the body will take place through the Word made -flesh.</p> -<p>792 Then (v 29), he shows the justness of his judgment: because the good will be rewarded, and -so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">And those who have done well will come forth to a resurrection of life, </span>i.e., to -living in eternal glory; but the wicked will be damned, and so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">those who have done evil -will come forth to a resurrection of judgment [i.e., condemnation], </span>i.e., they will rise for -condemnation: “These,” the wicked, “will go into everlasting punishment; but the just will go -to eternal life” (Mt 25:46); “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some -to an everlasting life, and others to everlasting shame” (Dn 12:2).</p> -<p>793 Note than when he was speaking above of the resurrection of souls, he said, “those who hear -it,” the voice of the Son of God, “will live” (5:25); but here he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">will come forth. </span>He says -this because of the wicked, who will be condemned: for their life should not be called a life, but -rather an eternal death. Again, above he mentioned only faith, saying, “Whoever hears my voice -and believes in him who sent me, possesses eternal life; and he will not encounter judgment” -(5:24). But here he mentions works, so that we do not think that faith alone, without works, is -sufficient for salvation, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">And those who have done well will come forth to a -resurrection of life. </span>As if to say: <span style="font-weight: bold">Those will come forth to a resurrection of life </span>who do not -just believe, but who have accomplished good works along with their faith: “Faith without works -is dead,” as we see from James (2:26).</p> -<p>794 Then when he says, I cannot do anything of myself, he gives the reason for what he has just -said. Now he had spoken of two things: the origin of his power, and the justness of his judgment. +<p>777 Thirdly, he mentions a reward when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">but has passed from death to life,</span> or +“will pass,” as another version says. This statement +can be explained in two ways. First, it can refer to the +resurrection of the soul. In this case the obvious meaning is that +he is saying: Through faith we attain not only to eternal life and +freedom from judgment, but also to the forgiveness of our sins as +well. Hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but has +passed,</span> from unbelief to belief, from injustice to justice: +“We know that we have passed from death to life” (1 Jn +3:14).</p> +<p>Secondly, this statement can be explained as referring to the +resurrection of the body. Then it is an elaboration of the phrase, +<span style="font-weight: bold">possesses eternal life</span>. For +some might think from what was said, that whoever believes in God +will never die, but live forever. But this is impossible, because +all men must pay the debt incurred by the. first sin, according to: +“Where is the man who lives, and will not see death?” +(Ps 88:49). Consequently, we should not think that one who believes +has eternal life in such a way as never to die; rather, he will +pass from thi’s life, through death, to life, i.e., through +the death of the body he will be revived to eternal life.</p> +<p>Or, “will pass,” might refer to the cause [of +one’s resurrection] for when a person believes, he already +has the merit for a glorious resurrection: “Your dead will +live, your slain will rise” (Is 26:19). And then, once +released from the death of the old man, we will receive the life of +the new man, that is, Christ.</p> +<p>778 <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to +you...</span> Since some might doubt if any would pass from death +to life, our Lord predicts that this will happen, saying: I say +that he [who believes] “will pass from death to life”; +and I say it before it actually occurs. And this is what he states, +saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">Amen, amen, I say to you, +the hour is coming,</span> not determined by a necessity of fate, +but by God’s decree: “It is the last hour” (1 Jn +2:18). And so that we do not think that it is far off, he adds, +<span style="font-weight: bold">and is now here</span> “it is +now the time for us to rise froin sleep” (Rom +13:11)—i.e., the hour is now here <span style= +"font-weight: bold">when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son +of God; and those who hear it will live.</span></p> +<p>779 This can be explained in two ways. In one way as referring +to the resurrection of the body, and so it is said that +<span style="font-weight: bold">the hour is coming, and is now +here,</span> as if he had said: It is true that eventually all will +rise, but even now is the hour when some, whom the Lord was about +to resuscitate, <span style="font-weight: bold">shall hear the +voice of the Son of God.</span> This is the way Lazarus heard it +when it was said to him, “Come forth,” as we read below +(11:43); and in this way the daughter of the leader of the +synagogue heard it (Mt 9:18); and the widow’s son (Lk 7:12). +Therefore, he says significantly, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and is now here,</span> because through me the +dead already are beginning to be raised.</p> +<p>Another explanation is given by Augustine, according to which +<span style="font-weight: bold">and is now here</span> refers to +the resurrection of the soul. For as was said above, resurrection +is of two kinds: the resurrection of bodies, which will happen in +the future; this does not take place now, but will occur at the +future judgment. The other is the resurrection of souls from the +death of unbelief to the life of faith, and from the life of +injustice to that of justice; and this is now here. Hence he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">the hour is coming, and is now +here, when the dead,</span> i.e., unbelievers and sinners, +<span style="font-weight: bold">shall hear the voice of the Son of +God; and those who hear it will live,</span> according to the true +faith.</p> +<p>780 This passage seems to imply two strange occurrences. One, +when he says that the dead will hear. The other, when he adds that +it is through hearing that they will come to life again, as though +hearing comes before life, whereas hearing is a certain function of +life. However, if we refer this to the resurrection, it is true +that the dead will hear, i.e., obey the voice of the Son of God. +For the voice expresses the interior concept. Now all nature obeys +the slightest command of the divine will: “He calls into +existence what does not exist” (Rom 4:17). According to this, +then, wood, stones, all things, not just the dry bones but also the +dust of dead bodies, <span style="font-weight: bold">shall hear the +voice of the Son of God</span> so far as they obey his slightest +will. And this belongs to Christ, not insofar as he is the Son of +Man, but insofar as he is the Son of God, because all things obey +the Word of God. And so he significantly says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">of the Son of God;</span> “What kind of +man is this, for the sea and winds obey him?” (Mt 8:27).</p> +<p>If this statement (25b) is understood as referring to the +resurrection of souls, then the reason for it is this: the voice of +the Son of God has a life-giving power, that voice by which he +moves the hearts of the faithful interiorly by inspiration, or +exteriorly by his preaching and that of others: “The words +that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (below 6:64). +And so he gives life to the dead when he justifies the wicked. And +since hearing is the way to life, either of nature through +obedience, namely, by repairing nature, or the hearing of faith by +repairing life and justice, he therefore says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and those who hear it,</span> by obedience as +to the resurrection of the body, or by faith as to the resurrection +of souls, will live, in the body in eternal life, and injustice in +the life of grace.</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>26 “Indeed, just as the Father possesses life in himself, +so he has given it to the Son to have life in himself. 27 And he +[the Father] gave him the power to pass judgment, because he is the +Son of Man. 28 Do not be surprised at this, since the hour is +coming when all those burried in tombs will hear the voice of the +Son of God. 29 And those who have done well will come forth to a +resurrection of life; those who have done evil will come forth to a +resurrection of judgment [i.e., condemnation]. 30 I cannot do +anything of myself, but I judge only as I hear it; and my judgment +is just, because I am not seeking my own will, but the will of him +who sent me.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>781 Above, our Lord showed that he had the power to give life +and to judge; and he explained each by its effect. Here he shows +how each of these powers belongs to him. First, he shows this with +respect to his life-giving power. Secondly, with respect to his +power to judge (v 27).</p> +<p>782 So he says, first: I say that as the Father raises the dead, +so I do also; and anyone who hears my word has eternal life. And I +possess this because, <span style="font-weight: bold">just as the +Father possesses life in himself, so he has given it to the Son to +have life in himself.</span></p> +<p>Apropos of this, we should note that some who live do not have +life in themselves: as Paul, “I am living by faith in the Son +of God” (Gal 2:20); and again in the same place: “it is +not I who now live, but Christ lives in me.” Thus he lived, +yet not in himself, but in another through whom he lived: as a body +lives, although it does not have life in itself, but in a soul +through which it lives. So that has life in itself which has an +essential, non-participated life, i.e., that which is itself life. +Now in every genus of things, that which is something through its +essence is the cause of those things that are it by participation, +as fire is the cause of all things afire. And so, that which is +life through its essence, is the cause and principle of all life in +living things. Accordingly, if something is to be a principle of +life, it must be life through its essence. And so our Lord +fittingly shows that he is the principle of all life by saying that +he has life in himself, i.e., through his essence, when he says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">just as the Father possesses life +in himself,</span> i.e., as he is living through his essence, so +does the Son. Therefore, as the Father is the cause of life, so +also is his Son.</p> +<p>Further, he shows the equality of the Son to the Father when he +says, as <span style="font-weight: bold">the Father possesses life +in himself;</span> and he shows their distinction when he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">he has given it to the Son</span>. +For the Father and the Son are equal in life; but they are +distinct, because the Father gives, and the Son receives. However, +we should not understand this to mean that the Son receives life +from the Father as if the Son first existed without having life, as +in lower things a first matter, already existing, receives a form, +and as a subject receives accidents: because in the Son there is +nothing that exists prior to the reception of life. For as Hilary +says: “the Son has nothing unless it is begotten,” +i.e., nothing but what he receives through his birth. And since the +Father is life itself, the meaning of, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">he has given it to the Son to have life in +himself,</span> is that the Father produced the Son as living. As +if one were to say: the mind gives life to the word, not as though +the word existed and then receives life, but because the mind +produces the word in the same life by which it lives.</p> +<p>783 According to Hilary, this passage destroys three heresies. +First, that of the Arians, who said that the Son is inferior to the +Father. They were forced by what was stated earlier, that is, +“For whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise” +(5:19), to say that the Son is equal to the Father in power; but +they still denied that the Son is equal to the Father in nature. +But now, this too is refuted by this statement, namely, +<span style="font-weight: bold">just as the Father possesses life +in himself, so he has given it to the Son to have life in +himself.</span> For since life pertains to the nature, if the Son +has life in himself as does the Father, it is clear that he has in +himself, by his very origin, a nature indivisible froin and equal +to that ofthe Father.</p> +<p>The second error is also Arian: their denial that the Son is +coeternal with the Father, when they say that the Son began to +exist in time. This is destroyed when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Son has life in himself.</span> For in all +living things whose generation occurs in time, it is always +possible to find something that at some time or other was not +living. But in the Son, whatever is, is life itself. Consequently, +he so received life itself that he has life in himself, so as +always to have been living.</p> +<p>Thirdly, by saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">he has +given,</span> he destroys the error of Sabellius, who denied the +distinction of persons. For if the Father gave life to the Son, it +is obvious that the Father, who gave it, is other than the Son, who +received it.</p> +<p>784 Then (v 27), he makes it clear that he has the power to +judge. First, he reveals his judiciary power. Secondly, he gives a +reason for what he has said (v 30). As to the first he does two +things. First, he indicates the origin of his judiciary power. +Secondly, he shows that his judgment is just (v 29).</p> +<p>785 With regard to the first, we should note that his statement, +<span style="font-weight: bold">he [the Father] gave him the +power,</span> can be understood in two ways. One way is that of +Augustine; the other is that of Chrysostom.</p> +<p>786 If we understand it as Chrysostom does, then this section is +divided into two parts. First, he reveals the origin of his +judiciary power. Secondly, he settles a difficulty (v 27b).</p> +<p>Chrysostom punctuates this section in the following way. +<span style="font-weight: bold">He gave him the power to pass +judgment.</span> And then a new sentence begins: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Because he is the Son of Man, do not be +surprised at this.</span> The reason for this punctuation is that +Paul of Samosata, an early heretic, who like Photius said that +Christ was only a man and took his origin from the Virgin, +punctuated it as: <span style="font-weight: bold">He gave him the +power to pass judghnent because he is the Son of Man.</span> And +then he began a new sentence: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do +not be surprised at this, since the hour is coming.</span> It was +as if he thought that it was necessary for judiciary power to be +given to Christ because he is the Son of Man, that is, a mere man, +who, of himself, cannot judge men. And so, if Christ is to judge +others, he must be given the power to judge.</p> +<p>But this, according to Chrysostom, cannot stand, because it is +not at all in agreement with what is stated. For if it is because +he is a man that he receives judiciary power, then for the same +reason, since it would belong to every man to have judiciary power +in virtue of his human nature, it would not belong to Christ any +more than to other men. So we should not understand it this way. +Rather, we should say that because Christ is the ineffable Son of +God, he is on that account also judge. And this is what he says: +The Father not only give him the power to give life, but +<span style="font-weight: bold">also he gave him the power,</span> +through eternal <span style="font-weight: bold">generation, to pass +judgment,</span> just as he gave him, through eternal generation, +to have life in himself: “He is the one appointed by God to +be the judge of the living and of the dead,” as we read in +Acts (10:42).</p> +<p>He settles a difficulty when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this.</span> First, he +mentions the difficulty. Secondly, he clears it up.</p> +<p>787 The difficulty arose in the minds of the Jews and they were +surprised because while they thought that Christ was no more than a +man, he was saying things about himself that surpassed man and even +the angels. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be +surprised at this,</span> that is, that I have said that the Son +gives life to the dead and has the power to judge precisely +<span style="font-weight: bold">because he is the Son of +Man.</span> They were surprised because, although they thought he +was only a man, they saw that he accomplished divine effects: +“What kind of man is this, for the sea and winds obey +him?” (Mt 8:27). And he gives a reason why they should not be +surprised, which is, because he who is the Son of Man is the Son of +God. Although, as Chrysostom says, is it not said explicitly that +the Son of Man is the Son of God, our Lord lays down the premises +from which this statement necessarily follows: just as we notice +that those who use syllogisms in their teaching do not express +their main conclusion, but only that from which it follows with +necessity. So our Lord does not say that he is the Son of God, but +that the Son of Man is such that at his voice all the dead will +rise. From this it necessarily follows that he is the Son of God: +for it is a proper effect of God to raise the dead. Thus he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at this, since +the hour is coming when all those burried in tombs will hear the +voice of the Son of God.</span> But he does not say of this hour, +as he said above, “and is now here” (5:25). Again, here +he says, all, which he did not say above: because at the first +resurrection he raised only some, as Lazarus, the widow’s son +and the young girl; but at the future resurrection, at the time of +judgment, <span style="font-weight: bold">all will hear the voice +of the Son of God,</span> and will rise. “I will open your +graves, and lead you out of your tombs” (Ez 37:12).</p> +<p>788 Augustine punctuates this passage in the following way. +<span style="font-weight: bold">And he gave him the power to pass +judgment because he is the Son of Man.</span> And then a new +sentence follows: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be +surprised at this.</span> In this interpretation there are two +parts. The first concerns the power to judge granted to the Son of +Man. In the second, the granting of an even greater power is made +clear, at <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at +this.</span></p> +<p>789 As to the first we should note that, according to the mind +of Augustine, he spoke above of the resurrection of souls, which is +accomplished through the Son of God, but here he is speaking of the +resurrection of bodies, which is accomplished through the Son of +Man. And because the general resurrection of bodies will take place +at the time of judgment, he mentions the judgment first, in saying, +<span style="font-weight: bold">And he [the Father] gave +him,</span> i.e., Christ, <span style="font-weight: bold">the power +to pass Judgment,</span> and this, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">because he is the Son of Man,</span> i.e., +according to his human nature. Thus it is also after the +resurrection that he says in Matthew (28:18): “All power has +been given to me, in heaven and on earth.”</p> +<p>There are three reasons why judiciary power has been given to +Christ as man. First, in order that he might be seen by all: for it +is necessary that a judge be seen by all who are to be judged. Now +both the good and the wicked will be judged. And the good will see +Christ in his divinity and in his humanity; while the wicked will +not be able to see him in his divinity, because this vision is the +happiness of the saints and is seedonly by the pure in heart: +“Happy are the pure in heart, for they will see God” +(Mt 5:8). And so, in order that Christ can be seen at the judgment +not only by the good, but also by the wicked, he will judge in +human form: “Every eye will see him, and all who pierced +him” (Rv 1:7).</p> +<p>Secondly, the power to judge was given to Christ as man because +by the self-abasement of his passion he merited the glory of an +exaltation. Thus, just as he who died arose, so that [human] form +which was judged, will judge, and he who stood before a human judge +will preside at the judgment of men. He who was falsely found +guilty will condemn the truly guilty, as Augustine remarks in his +work, <i>The Sayings of the Lord.</i> “Your cause has been +judged as that of the wicked; but cause and judgment you will +recover” (Jb 3 6.17).</p> +<p>Thirdly, Christas man was given judiciary power to suggest the +compassion of the judge. For it is very terrifying for a man to be +judged by God: “It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands +of the living God” (Heb 10:31); but it produces confidence +for a man to have another man as his judge. Accordingly, so you can +experience the compassion of your judge, you will have a man as +judge: “We do not have a high priest who cannot have +compassion on our weakness” (Heb 4:15).</p> +<p>Thus, <span style="font-weight: bold">he gave him</span>, +Christ, <span style="font-weight: bold">the power to pass judgment +because he is the Son of Man.</span></p> +<p>790 <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not be surprised at +this,</span> for he has given him a greater power, that is, the +power to raise the dead. Thus he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">since the hour is coming,</span> that is, the +last hour at the end of the world: “The time has come, the +day of slaughter is near” (Ez 7:7), <span style= +"font-weight: bold">when all those burried in tombs will hear the +voice of the Son of God.</span> Above he did not say +“all,” because there he was speaking of the spiritual +resurrection, in which all did not rise at his first coming, for we +read: “All do not have faith” (2 Thes 3:2). But here he +is speaking of the resurrection of the body, and all will rise in +this way, as we read in 1 Corinthians (15:20). He adds, +<span style="font-weight: bold">those burried in tombs,</span> +which he had not mentioned above, because only bodies, not souls, +are in tombs, and it is the resurrection of bodies that will then +take place.</p> +<p><span style="font-weight: bold">All those burried in tombs will +hear the voice of the Son of God.</span> This voice will be a sense +perceptible sign of the Son of God, at whose sound all will be +raised: “The Lord will come with the cry of the archangel and +with the trumpet of God” (1 Thes 4:15); we find the same in 1 +Corinthians (15:52) and in Matthew (25:6): “There was a cry +at midnight.” This voice will derive its power from the +divinity of Christ: “He will make his voice a powerful +voice,” as the Psalm (67:34) says.</p> +<p>791 As we saw, Augustine says that the resurrection of the body +will be accomplished through the Word made flesh, but the +resurrection of the soul is accomplished through the Word. One may +wonder how to understand this: whether we are talking about a first +cause or a meritorious cause. If we are referring to a first cause, +then it is clear that the divinity of Christ is the cause of the +corporal and spiritual resurrection, i.e., of the resurrection of +bodies and of souls, according to: “I will kill, and I will +bring to life again” (Dt 32:39). But if we are referring to a +meritorious cause, then it is the humanity of Christ which is the +cause of both resurrections: because through the mysteries +accomplished in the flesh of Christ we are restored not only to an +incorruptible life in our bodies, but also to a spiritual life in +our souls: “He was put to death on account of our sins, and +he rose for our justification” (Rom 4:25). Accordingly, what +Augustine says does not seem to be true.</p> +<p>I answer that Augustine is speaking of the exemplary cause and +of that cause by which that which is brought to life is made +conformable to that which brings it to life: for everything that +lives through another is conformed to that through which it lives. +Now the resurrection of souls does not consist in souls being +conformed to the humanity of Christ, but to the Word, because the +life of the soul is through the Word alone; and so he says that the +resurrection of souls takes place through the Word. But the +resurrection of the body will consist in our bodies being conformed +to the body of Christ through the life of glory, that is, through +the glory of our bodies, according to: “He will change our +lowly body so it is like his glorious body” (Phil 3:2 1). And +it is from this point of view that he says that the resurrection of +the body will take place through the Word made flesh.</p> +<p>792 Then (v 29), he shows the justness of his judgment: because +the good will be rewarded, and so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">And those who have done well will come forth to +a resurrection of life,</span> i.e., to living in eternal glory; +but the wicked will be damned, and so he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">those who have done evil will come forth to a +resurrection of judgment [i.e., condemnation],</span> i.e., they +will rise for condemnation: “These,” the wicked, +“will go into everlasting punishment; but the just will go to +eternal life” (Mt 25:46); “Many of those who sleep in +the dust of the earth will awake: some to an everlasting life, and +others to everlasting shame” (Dn 12:2).</p> +<p>793 Note than when he was speaking above of the resurrection of +souls, he said, “those who hear it,” the voice of the +Son of God, “will live” (5:25); but here he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">will come forth.</span> He says +this because of the wicked, who will be condemned: for their life +should not be called a life, but rather an eternal death. Again, +above he mentioned only faith, saying, “Whoever hears my +voice and believes in him who sent me, possesses eternal life; and +he will not encounter judgment” (5:24). But here he mentions +works, so that we do not think that faith alone, without works, is +sufficient for salvation, saying: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">And those who have done well will come forth to +a resurrection of life.</span> As if to say: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Those will come forth to a resurrection of +life</span> who do not just believe, but who have accomplished good +works along with their faith: “Faith without works is +dead,” as we see from James (2:26).</p> +<p>794 Then when he says, I cannot do anything of myself, he gives +the reason for what he has just said. Now he had spoken of two +things: the origin of his power, and the justness of his judgment. Consequently, he mentions the reason for each.</p> -<p>795 The first point, when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">I cannot do anything of myself, </span>can be understood in two -ways, even according to Augustine. First, as referring to the Son of Man in this manner: You say -that you have the power to raise the dead because you are the Son of Man. But do you have this -power precisely because you are the Son of Man? No, because <span style="font-weight: bold">I cannot do anything of myself, -but I judge only as I hear it. </span>He does not say, “as I see,” as he said above; “The Son cannot do -anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing” (5:19). But he does say, <span style="font-weight: bold">as I hear -it: </span>for in this context “to hear” is the same as “to obey.” Now to obey belongs to one who -receives a command, while to command pertains to one who is superior. Accordingly, because -Christ, as man, is inferior to the Father, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">as I hear it, </span>i.e., as infused into my soul by God. -We read of this kind of hearing in Psalm 84 (v 9): “1 will hear what the Lord God says in me.” -But above he said “sees,” because he was then speaking of himself as the Word of God.</p> -<p>796 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and my judgment is just, </span>he shows the justness of his judgment. For -he had said: “Those who have done well will come forth to a resurrection of life.” But some -might say: Will he be partial and uneven when he punishes and rewards? So he answers: No, -saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">my judgment is just; </span>and the reason is <span style="font-weight: bold">because I am not seeking my own will, but the -will of him who sent me. </span>For there are two wills in our Lord Jesus Christ: one is a divine will, -which is the same as the will of the Father; the other is a human will, which is proper to himself, -just as it is proper to him to be a man. A human will is borne to its own good; but in Christ it was -ruled and regulated by right reason, so that it would always be conformed in all things to the -divine will. Accordingly he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">I am not seeking my own will, </span>which as such is inclined to -its own good, <span style="font-weight: bold">but the will of him who sent me, </span>that is, the Father: “I have desired to do your -will, my God” (Ps 39:9); “Not as I will, but as you will” (Mt 26:39).</p> -<p>If this is carefully considered, the Lord is assigning the true nature of a just judgment, saying: -<span style="font-weight: bold">because I am not seeking my own will. </span>For one’s judgment is just when it is passed according -to the norm of law. But the divine will is the norm and the law of the created will. And so, the -created will, and the reason, which is regulated according to the norm of the divine will, is just, -and its judgment is just.</p> -<p>797 Secondly, it is explained as referring to the Son of God; and then the aforesaid division still -remains the same. Thus Christ, as the Divine Word showing the origin of his power, says: <span style="font-weight: bold">I -cannot do anything of myself, </span>in the way he said above, “the Son cannot do anything of -himself” (5:19). For his very doing and his power are his being (<i>esse</i>); but being (<i>esse</i>)<i> </i>in him -is from another, that is, from his Father. And so, just as he is not of himself (a <i>se</i>), so of himself -he cannot do anything: “I do nothing of myself” (below 8:28).</p> -<p>His statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">I judge only as I hear it, </span>is explained as his previous statement, “only what he -sees the Father doing” (above 5:19). For we acquire science or any knowledge through sight and -hearing (for these two senses are those most used in learning). But because sight and hearing are -different is us, we acquire knowledge in one way through sight, that is, by discovering things, and -in a different way through hearing, that is, by being taught. But in the Son of God, sight and -hearing are the same; thus, when he says either “sees” or “hears,” the meaning is the same so far -as the acquisition of knowledge is concerned. And because judgment in any intelletual nature -comes from knowledge, he says significantly, <span style="font-weight: bold">I judge only as I hear it, </span>i.e., as I have acquired -knowledge together with heing from the Father, so I judge: “Everything I have heard from my -Father I have made known to you” (below 15:15).</p> -<p>798 Showing the justness of his judgment he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">and my judgment is just: </span>the reason being, -<span style="font-weight: bold">because I am not seeking my own will</span>. But do not the Father and the Son have the same will? -I answer that the Father and the Son do have the same will, but the Father does not have his will -from another, whereas the Son does have his will from another, i.e., from the Father. Thus the -Son accomplishes his own will as from another, i.e., as having it from another; but the Father -accomplishes his will as his own, i.e., not having it from another. Thus he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">I am not seeking -my own will</span>, that is, such as would be mine if it originated from myself, but my will, as being -from another, that is from the Father.</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>31 “If I were to bear witness to myself, -<br>my testimony would not be valid. -<br>32 But there is someone else who testifies -<br>on my behalf, and I know that the witness -<br>he bears on my behalf is true. -<br>33 You sent [messengers] to John; -<br>and he bore witness to the truth. -<br>34 I myself do not need proof from men; -<br>but I say this in order that you may be saved. -<br>35 He was a lamp, blazing and burning brightly. -<br>And for a while you yourselves exulted in his light. -<br>36 But I have testimony that is greater than that of John. -<br>The very works which my Father has given me -<br>to perform—those works that I myself perform— -<br>they bear witness to me that the Father sent me. -<br>37 Moreover, the Father who sent me has himself -<br>given testimony on my behalf, -<br>but you have neither heard his voice, -<br>nor seen his image; -<br>38 and you do not have his word abiding in your hearts, -<br>for you do not believe in him whom he has sent. -<br>39 Search the Scriptures, -<br>since you think you have eternal life in them; -<br>they too bear witness to me. -<br>40 Yet you are unwilling to come to me -<BR>in order to possess that life.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>799 Having given us the teaching on the life-giving power of the Son, he now confirms it. First, -he confirms, with several testimonies, what he had said about the excellence of his power. In the -second place, he reproves them because of their slowness to believe (v 41). He does two things -about the first. First, he states why there was a need to resort to such testimonies. Secondly, he -invokes the testimonies (v 32).</p> -<p>800 The need to appeal to testimony arose because the Jews did not believe in him; for this -reason he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">If I were to bear witness to myself, my testimony would not be valid </span>(<i>verum</i>, -valid, true). Some may find this statement puzzling: for if our Lord says of himself, “I am the -truth” (below 14:6), how can his testimony not be valid? If he is the truth, in whom shall one -believe if the truth itself is not believed in? We may answer, according to Chrysostom, that our -Lord is speaking here of himself from the point of view of the opinion of others, so that his -meaning is: <span style="font-weight: bold">If I were to bear witness to myself, my testimony would not be valid </span>so far as -your outlook is concerned, because you do not accept what I say about myself unless it is -confirmed by other testimony: “You are bearing witness to yourself; your testimony is not valid” +<p>795 The first point, when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">I cannot do anything of myself,</span> can be +understood in two ways, even according to Augustine. First, as +referring to the Son of Man in this manner: You say that you have +the power to raise the dead because you are the Son of Man. But do +you have this power precisely because you are the Son of Man? No, +because <span style="font-weight: bold">I cannot do anything of +myself, but I judge only as I hear it.</span> He does not say, +“as I see,” as he said above; “The Son cannot do +anything of himself, but only what he sees the Father doing” +(5:19). But he does say, <span style="font-weight: bold">as I hear +it:</span> for in this context “to hear” is the same as +“to obey.” Now to obey belongs to one who receives a +command, while to command pertains to one who is superior. +Accordingly, because Christ, as man, is inferior to the Father, he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">as I hear it,</span> i.e., as +infused into my soul by God. We read of this kind of hearing in +Psalm 84 (v 9): “1 will hear what the Lord God says in +me.” But above he said “sees,” because he was +then speaking of himself as the Word of God.</p> +<p>796 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and my +judgment is just,</span> he shows the justness of his judgment. For +he had said: “Those who have done well will come forth to a +resurrection of life.” But some might say: Will he be partial +and uneven when he punishes and rewards? So he answers: No, saying: +<span style="font-weight: bold">my judgment is just;</span> and the +reason is <span style="font-weight: bold">because I am not seeking +my own will, but the will of him who sent me.</span> For there are +two wills in our Lord Jesus Christ: one is a divine will, which is +the same as the will of the Father; the other is a human will, +which is proper to himself, just as it is proper to him to be a +man. A human will is borne to its own good; but in Christ it was +ruled and regulated by right reason, so that it would always be +conformed in all things to the divine will. Accordingly he says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">I am not seeking my own +will,</span> which as such is inclined to its own good, +<span style="font-weight: bold">but the will of him who sent +me,</span> that is, the Father: “I have desired to do your +will, my God” (Ps 39:9); “Not as I will, but as you +will” (Mt 26:39).</p> +<p>If this is carefully considered, the Lord is assigning the true +nature of a just judgment, saying: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">because I am not seeking my own will.</span> +For one’s judgment is just when it is passed according to the +norm of law. But the divine will is the norm and the law of the +created will. And so, the created will, and the reason, which is +regulated according to the norm of the divine will, is just, and +its judgment is just.</p> +<p>797 Secondly, it is explained as referring to the Son of God; +and then the aforesaid division still remains the same. Thus +Christ, as the Divine Word showing the origin of his power, says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">I cannot do anything of +myself,</span> in the way he said above, “the Son cannot do +anything of himself” (5:19). For his very doing and his power +are his being (<i>esse</i>); but being (<i>esse</i>) in him is from +another, that is, from his Father. And so, just as he is not of +himself (a <i>se</i>), so of himself he cannot do anything: +“I do nothing of myself” (below 8:28).</p> +<p>His statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">I judge only as I +hear it,</span> is explained as his previous statement, “only +what he sees the Father doing” (above 5:19). For we acquire +science or any knowledge through sight and hearing (for these two +senses are those most used in learning). But because sight and +hearing are different is us, we acquire knowledge in one way +through sight, that is, by discovering things, and in a different +way through hearing, that is, by being taught. But in the Son of +God, sight and hearing are the same; thus, when he says either +“sees” or “hears,” the meaning is the same +so far as the acquisition of knowledge is concerned. And because +judgment in any intelletual nature comes from knowledge, he says +significantly, <span style="font-weight: bold">I judge only as I +hear it,</span> i.e., as I have acquired knowledge together with +heing from the Father, so I judge: “Everything I have heard +from my Father I have made known to you” (below 15:15).</p> +<p>798 Showing the justness of his judgment he says: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and my judgment is just:</span> the reason +being, <span style="font-weight: bold">because I am not seeking my +own will</span>. But do not the Father and the Son have the same +will? I answer that the Father and the Son do have the same will, +but the Father does not have his will from another, whereas the Son +does have his will from another, i.e., from the Father. Thus the +Son accomplishes his own will as from another, i.e., as having it +from another; but the Father accomplishes his will as his own, +i.e., not having it from another. Thus he says: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">I am not seeking my own will</span>, that is, +such as would be mine if it originated from myself, but my will, as +being from another, that is from the Father.</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">31 “If I were to bear witness to +myself,<br /> +my testimony would not be valid.<br /> +32 But there is someone else who testifies<br /> +on my behalf, and I know that the witness<br /> +he bears on my behalf is true.<br /> +33 You sent [messengers] to John;<br /> +and he bore witness to the truth.<br /> +34 I myself do not need proof from men;<br /> +but I say this in order that you may be saved.<br /> +35 He was a lamp, blazing and burning brightly.<br /> +And for a while you yourselves exulted in his light.<br /> +36 But I have testimony that is greater than that of John.<br /> +The very works which my Father has given me<br /> +to perform—those works that I myself perform—<br /> +they bear witness to me that the Father sent me.<br /> +37 Moreover, the Father who sent me has himself<br /> +given testimony on my behalf,<br /> +but you have neither heard his voice,<br /> +nor seen his image;<br /> +38 and you do not have his word abiding in your hearts,<br /> +for you do not believe in him whom he has sent.<br /> +39 Search the Scriptures,<br /> +since you think you have eternal life in them;<br /> +they too bear witness to me.<br /> +40 Yet you are unwilling to come to me<br /> +in order to possess that life.”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>799 Having given us the teaching on the life-giving power of the +Son, he now confirms it. First, he confirms, with several +testimonies, what he had said about the excellence of his power. In +the second place, he reproves them because of their slowness to +believe (v 41). He does two things about the first. First, he +states why there was a need to resort to such testimonies. +Secondly, he invokes the testimonies (v 32).</p> +<p>800 The need to appeal to testimony arose because the Jews did +not believe in him; for this reason he says: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">If I were to bear witness to myself, my +testimony would not be valid</span> (<i>verum</i>, valid, true). +Some may find this statement puzzling: for if our Lord says of +himself, “I am the truth” (below 14:6), how can his +testimony not be valid? If he is the truth, in whom shall one +believe if the truth itself is not believed in? We may answer, +according to Chrysostom, that our Lord is speaking here of himself +from the point of view of the opinion of others, so that his +meaning is: <span style="font-weight: bold">If I were to bear +witness to myself, my testimony would not be valid</span> so far as +your outlook is concerned, because you do not accept what I say +about myself unless it is confirmed by other testimony: “You +are bearing witness to yourself; your testimony is not valid” (below 8:13).</p> -<p>801 Next, he presents these testimonies: first, a human testimony; secondly, a divine testimony. -He does two things about the first. First, he mentions the testimony of John; secondly, he tells -why this testimony was given (v 34). With respect to the first he does two things. First, he brings -in the testimony; secondly, he commends it (v 32).</p> -<p>802 He brings on the witness when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">But there is someone else who testifies on my -behalf. </span>This is, in the opinion of Chrysostom, John the Baptist, of whom we read above: “There -was a man sent by God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, that he might bear witness -to the light” (1:6).</p> -<p>803 He commends John’s testimony on two grounds: first, because of its truth; secondly, because -of its authority, for the Jews had sought it (v 33).</p> -<p>804 He commends his testimony because of its truth, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">And I know, </span>from certain -experience, that the witness he, that is, John, <span style="font-weight: bold">bears on my behalf is true. </span>His father, Zechariah, -had prophesied this of him: “You will go before the face of the Lord to prepare his way, to give -his people a knowledge of salvation” (Lk 1:76). Now it is obvious that false testimony is not a -testimony that saves, because lying is a cause of death: “A lying mouth kills the soul” (Wis 1:11). -Therefore, if John’s testimony was for the purpose of giving knowledge of salvation to his -people, his testimony is true.</p> -<p>805 The Gloss has a different explanation of this: <span style="font-weight: bold">If I were to bear witness to myself, my -testimony would not be valid. </span>For above, Christ was referring to himself as God, but here he -is referring to himself as a man. And the meaning is: If I, namely, a man, were to bear witness -to myself, i.e., apart from God, that is, which God the Father does not certify, then it follows that -<span style="font-weight: bold">my testimony would not be valid, </span>for human speech has no truth unless it is supported by God, -according to: “God is true, but every man is a liar” (Rom 3:4). Thus, if we take Christ as a man -separated from the Deity and not in conformity with it, we find a lie both in his essence and in -his words: “Although I bear witness to myself, my testimony is true” (below 8:14); “I am not -alone, because the Father is with me” (below 16:32). And so, because he was not alone but with -the Father, his testimony is true.</p> -<p>Accordingly, to show that his testimony is true, not in virute of his humanity considered in itself, -but in so far as it is united to his divinity and to the Word of God, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But there is someone -else who testifies on my behalf</span>: not John, but the Father, according to this explanation. Because -if the testimony of Christ as man is not of itself true and productive, much less is the testimony -of John. Therefore, the testimony of Christ is not verified by the testimony of John, but by the -testimony of the Father. So this someone else who testifies is understood to be the Father. <span style="font-weight: bold">And -I know that the witness he bears on my behalf is true</span>, for he is truth: “God is light, “‘ i.e., -truth, “and in him there is no darkness,” i.e., lie (1 Jn 1:5).</p> -<p>The first explanation, which is that given by Chrysostom, is nearer to the letter of the text.</p> -<p>806 He also commends the testimony of John by reason of its authority, because it was sought -after by the Jews, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">You sent [messengers] to John. </span>As if to say: I know that his testimony -is true and you should not reject it, because the great authority John enjoyed among you led you -to seek his testimony about me; and you would not have done this if you did not think that he was -worthy of belief: “The Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to him” (above 1:19). And -on this occasion, John bore witness, not to himself, but <span style="font-weight: bold">to the truth</span>, i.e., to me. As a friend of -the truth, he bore testimony to the truth, which is Christ: “He declared openly, and did not deny, -and stated clearly, ‘I am not the Messiah’” (above 1:20).</p> -<p>807 Then (v 34), he gives the reason why an appeal was made to the testimony of John. First, he -excludes a supposed reason. Next, he presents the true reason (v 34b).</p> -<p>808 Someone might think that John’s testimony was brought in to assure them about Christ, on -the ground that Christ’s own testimony was not sufficient. He excludes this reason when he says, -<span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof from men</span>. Here we should note that sometimes in the sciences a -thing is proved by something else which is more evident to us, but which is less evident in itself; -and at other times a thing is proved by something else which is more evident in itself and -absolutely. Now, in this case, the issue is to prove that Christ is God. And, although the truth of -Christ is, in itself and absolutely, more evident, yet it is proved by the testimony of John, which -was better known to the Jews. So Christ, of himself, did not have any need of John’s testimony; -and this is what he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof from men</span>.</p> -<p>809 But this seems to conflict with: “You are my witnesses, said the Lord” (Is 40:10); and with -“You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all of Judea and Samaria, and to the remotest part -of the world” (Acts 1:8). So how can he say: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof from men</span>.</p> -<p>This can be understood in two ways. In the first way, the sense is: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof -from men</span>, as relying on it alone; but I have stronger testimony, that is, divine testimony: “For -me, it does not matter much if I am judged by you” (1 Cor 4:3); “You know that I have not -desired the day of man,” i.e., human glory (Jer 17:16).</p> -<p>Another interpretation is: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof from men</span>, insofar as the one giving -witness is a man, but insofar as he is enlightened by God in order to testify: “There was a man -sent by God, whose name was John” (above 1:6); “We did not seek glory from men” (1 Thes -2:6); “1 do not seek my own glory” (below 8:50). And so I receive the testimony of John not just -as a man, but insofar as he was sent and enlightened by God in order to testify.</p> -<p>A third explanation, and a better one, is: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof from men</span>, i.e., human -testimony. As far as I am concerned, I receive my authority from no one but God, who proves -that I am great.</p> -<p>810 Next (v 34b), he gives the real reason for appealing to John’s testimony. First, he states the -reason. Secondly, he explains it. The reason for appealing to this testimony was so that the Jews -might be saved by believing in Christ, and this because of John’s testimony. Thus he says: I do -not need John’s testimony for my sake, <span style="font-weight: bold">but I say this in order that you may be saved: </span>“He -desires the salvation of’ all men” (1 Tim 2:4). “Christ came into this world to save sinners” (1 -Tim 1:15).</p> -<p>811 He explains his statement, in order that you may be saved: that is, because I am appealing -to testimony you have accepted. And so he mentions that John was accepted by them: <span style="font-weight: bold">He was -a lamp, blazing and burning brightly. </span>First, he states that John was a witness accepted on his -own merits. Secondly, he mentions to what degree he was accepted by them (v 35b).</p> -<p>812 Three things perfected John and show that he was a witness accepted in his own right. The -first concerns the condition of his nature, and he refers to this when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">He was a lamp</span>. The -second concerns the perfection of his love, because he was a <span style="font-weight: bold">blazing </span>lamp. The third is related -to the perfection of his understanding, because he was a lamp that was <span style="font-weight: bold">burning brightly.</span></p> -<p>John was perfect in his nature because he was a lamp, i.e., enriched by grace and illumined by -the light of the Word of God. Now a lamp differs from a light: for a light radiates light of itself, -but a lamp does not give light of itself, but by participating in the light. Now the true light is -Christ: “He was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this world” (above 1:9). -John, however, was not a light, as we read in the same place, but a lamp, because he was -enlightened “in order to bear witness to the light” (above 1:8), by leading men to Christ. We read -of this lamp: “I have prepared a lamp for my anointed” (Ps 131:17).</p> -<p>Further, he was blazing and impassioned in his affections, so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">blazing</span>. For some people -are lamps only as to their office or rank, but they are snuffed out in their affections: for as a lamp -cannot give light unless there is a fire blazing within it, so a spiritual lamp does not give any light -unless it is first set ablaze and burns with the fire of love. Therefore, to be ablaze comes first, and -the giving of light depends on it, because knowledge of the truth is given due to the blazing of -love: “If any one loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will -come to him, and make our home with him” (below 14:23); and “I have called you friends, -because everything I have heard from my Father I have made known to you” (below 15:15); -“You who fear the Lord, love him, and your hearts will be enlightened” (Sir 2:20).</p> -<p>The two characteristics of fire are that it both blazes and shines. Its blazing signifies love for -three reasons. First, because fire is the most active of all bodies; so too is the warmth of love -(charity), so much so that nothing can withstand its force: “The love of Christ spurs us on” (2 Cor -5:14). Secondly, because just as fire, because it is very volatile, causes great unrest, so also this -love of charity makes a person restless until he achieves his objective: “Its light is fire and flame” -(Sg 8:6). Thirdly, just as fire is inclined to move upward, so too is charity; so much so that it -joins us to God: “He who abides in love abides in God, and God in him” (1Jn 4:16).</p> -<p>Finally, John had an intellect that was <span style="font-weight: bold">burning brightly. </span>First, it was bright within, because of -his knowledge of the truth: “The Lord will fill your soul with brightness,” i.e., he will make it -shine (Is 58:11). Secondly, it was bright without, because of his preaching: “You will shine in -the world among them like stars, containing the word of life” (Phil 2:15). Thirdly, it was bright -because it manifested good works: “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your -good works” (Mt 5:16).</p> -<p>813 And so, because John was of himself so acceptable—for he was a lamp, not smothered out -but blazing, not dark but burning brightly—he deserved to be accepted by you, as indeed he was, -because <span style="font-weight: bold">for a time you yourselves exulted in his light. </span>He fittingly links their exulting or -rejoicing with light; because a man rejoices most is that which most pleases him. And among -physical things nothing is more pleasant than light, according to: “It is a delight for the eyes to -see the sun” (Sir 11:7). He says, <span style="font-weight: bold">you yourselves exulted in his light, </span>i.e., you rested in John and -put your end in him, thinking that he was the Messiah. But you did this only <span style="font-weight: bold">for a time, </span>because -you wavered on this; for when you saw that John was leading men to another, and not to himself, -you turned away from him. Thus we read in Matthew (21:32) that the Jews did not believe in -John. They belonged to that group referred to by Matthew (13:21 ) as believing “for a while.”</p> -<p>814 Then (v 36), he presents the divine testimony. First, he mentions its greatness; and then he -continues on to describe it.</p> -<p>815 He says: I do not need proof from men for my sake, but for your sake, for <span style="font-weight: bold">I have testimony -that is greater than that of John, </span>that is, the testimony of God, which is greater than the -testimony of John: “If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater” (1 Jn -5:9), It is greater, I say, because of its greater authority, greater knowledge, and infallible truth, -for God cannot deceive: “God is not like man, a liar” (Nm 23:19).</p> -<p>816 God bore witness to Christ in three ways: by works, by himself, and by the Scriptures. First, -he mentions his witness as given by the working of miracles; secondly, the way God gave witness -by himself (v 37); thirdly, the witness given through the Scriptures (v 39).</p> -<p>817 He says first: <span style="font-weight: bold">I have testimony that is greater than that of John, </span>that is, my works, i.e., -the working of miracles, <span style="font-weight: bold">the very works which my Father has given me to perform. </span>We -should point out that it is natural for man to learn of the power and natures of things from their -actions, and therefore our Lord fittingly says that the sort of person he is can be learned through -the works he does. So, since he performed divine works by his own power, we should believe -that he has divine power within him: “If I had not done among them the works which no one else -did, they would not have sin,” that is, the sin of unbelief (below 15:24). And so he leads them -to a knowledge of himself by appealing to his works, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">the very works which my Father -has given me </span>in the Word, through an eternal generation, by giving me a power equal to his own. -Or we could say, <span style="font-weight: bold">the very works which my Father has given me, </span>in my conception, by making -me one person who is both God and man, <span style="font-weight: bold">to perform, </span>i.e., to perform them by my own power. -He says this to distinguish himself from those who do not perforrn miracles by their own power -but have to obtain it as a favor from God; thus Peter says: “In the name of Jesus Christ of -Nazareth: stand up” (Acts 3:6). Thus it was God, and not themselves, who accomplished these -works; but Christ accomplished them by his own power: “Lazarus, come forth,” as John reports -below (11:43). Accordingly, <span style="font-weight: bold">those works that I myself perform—they bear witness to me; -</span>“If you do not believe me, at least believe my works” (below 10:38). We see from Mark (16:20) -that God bears witness by the working of miracles: “The Lord worked with them and confirmed -the word by the signs that followed.”</p> -<p>818 Then (v 37), he presents the second way God bore witness to Christ, namely, by himself. -First, he mentions the way; secondly, he shows that they were not able to receive this testimony.</p> -<p>819 He says: It is not only the works which my Father has given me to perform that bear witness -to me, but <span style="font-weight: bold">the Father who sent me has himself given testimony on my behalf: </span>in the Jordan, -when Christ was baptized (Mt 3:17); and on the mountain, when Christ was transfigured (Mt -17:5). For on both these occasions the voice of the Father was heard: “This is my beloved Son.” -And so they should believe in Christ, as the true and natural Son of God: “This is the testimony -of God: he has borne witness to his Son” ( 1 Jn 5:9). Consequently, anyone who does not believe -that he is the Son of God, does not believe in the testimony of God.</p> -<p>820 Someone could say that God also gave testimony to others by himself: for example, to -Moses, on the mountain, with whom God spoke while others were present. We, however, never -heard his testimony, as the Lord says: <span style="font-weight: bold">you have neither heard his voice. </span>On the other hand, we -read in Deuteronomy (4:33): Did it ever happen before that the people heard the voice of God -speaking from the midst of fire, as you heard, and have lived?” Then how can Christ say: <span style="font-weight: bold">you -have neither heard his voice?</span></p> -<p>I reply, according to Chrysostom, that the Lord wishes to show those established in a -philosophical frame of mind that God gives testimony to someone in two ways, namely, sensibly -and intelligibly. Sensibly, as by a sensible voice only; and in this way he gave witness to Moses -on Mount Sinai: “You heard his voice, and saw no form at all” (Dt 4:12). Likewise, he gives -testimony by a sensible form, as he appeared to Abraham (Gn 26), and to Isaiah: “I saw the Lord -seated on a high and lofty throne” (Is 6:1). However, in these visions, neither the audible voice -nor the visible figure were like anything in the animal kingdom, except efficiently, in the sense -that these were formed by God. For since God is a spirit, he neither emits audible sounds nor can -he be portrayed as a figure. But he does bear testimony in an intelligible manner by inspiring in -the hearts of certain persons what they ought to believe and to hold: “I will hear what the Lord -God will speak within me” (Ps 84:9); “I will lead her into the wilderness and there I will speak -to her heart,” as we read in Hosea (2:14).</p> -<p>Now you were able to receive the testimony given in the first of these ways; and this is not -surprising, because they were the words and image of God only efficiently, as was said. But they -were not able to receive the testimony given in that intelligible voice; so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">you have -neither heard his voice, </span>i.e., you were not among those who shared in it. “Everyone who has -heard the Father and has learned, comes to me” (below 6:45). But you do not come to me. -Therefore, <span style="font-weight: bold">you have neither heard his voice nor seen his image, </span>i.e., you do not have his -intelligible testimony. Hence he adds: <span style="font-weight: bold">and you do not have his word abiding in your hearts, -</span>i.e., you do not have his word that is inwardly inspired. And the reason is, <span style="font-weight: bold">for you do not believe -in him whom he, </span>the Father, <span style="font-weight: bold">has sent</span>. For the word of God leads to Christ, since Christ himself -is the natural Word of God. But every word inspired by God is a certain participated likeness of -that Word. Therefore, since every participated likeness leads to its original, it is clear that every -word inspired by God leads to Christ. And so, because you are not led to me, <span style="font-weight: bold">you do not have -his word, </span>i.e., the inspired word of God, <span style="font-weight: bold">abiding in your hearts. </span>“He who does not believe in -the Son of God does not have life abiding in him,” as it says below (sic). He says <span style="font-weight: bold">abiding, -</span>because although there is no one who does not have some truth from God, they alone have the -truth and the word abiding in them whose knowledge has progressed to the point where they have -reached a knowledge of the true and natural Word.</p> -<p>821 Or we could say that, <span style="font-weight: bold">you have neither heard his voice, </span>can be taken as showing the three -ways in which God reveals things. This is done either by a sensible voice, as he bore witness to -Christ in the Jordan and on the mountain, as in 2 Peter (1:16): “We were eyewitnesses of his -greatness. For he received honor and glory from God the Father, when a voice came from the -heavens.” And the Jews did not hear this. Or, God reveals things through a vision of his essence, -which he reveals to the blessed. And they did not see this, because “while we are in the body, we -are absent from the Lord” (2 Cor 5:6). Thirdly, it is accomplished by an interior word through -an inspiration; and the Jews did not have this either.</p> -<p>822 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Search the Scriptures, </span>he gives the third way in which God bore -witness to Christ, through the Scriptures. First, he mentions the testimony of the Scriptures. -Secondly, he shows that they were not able to gather the fruit of this testimony (v 40).</p> -<p>823 He says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Search the Scriptures. </span>As if to say: You do not have the word of God in your -hearts, but in the Scriptures; therefore, you must seek for it elsewhere than in your hearts. Hence, -<span style="font-weight: bold">Search the Scriptures, </span>that is, the Old Testament, for the faith of Christ was contained in the -Old Testament, but not on the surface, for it lay hidden in its depths, under shadowy symbols: -“Even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil is over their hearts” (2 Cor 3:15). Thus he -significantly says, Search, probe into the depths: “If you search for her [wisdom] like money, and -dig for her like a treasure, you will understand the fear of the Lord and will find the knowledge -of God” (Prv 2:4); “Give me understanding and I will search your commandments” (Ps 118:34).</p> -<p>The reason why you should search them I take from your own opinion, because <span style="font-weight: bold">you think you -have eternal life in them, </span>since we read in Ezekiel (18:19): “He who has kept my commands -will live.” But you are mistaken; because although the precepts of the old law are living, they do -not contain life in themselves. They are said to be living only to the extent that they lead to me, -the Christ. Yet you use them as though they contained life in themselves, and in this you are -mistaken, for they bear witness to me, i.e., they are living to the extent that they lead to a -knowledge of me. And they lead to a knowledge of me either by plain prophecies, as in Isaiah -(7:14): “A virgin will conceive.” or in Deuteronomy (18:15): “The Lord your God will raise up -a prophet for you.”; and so Acts (10:43) says: “All the prophets bear witness to him.” The -Scriptures also lead to a knowledge of Christ through the symbolic actions of the prophets; thus -we read: “I have used resemblences in the ministry of the prophets” (Hos 12:10). Knowledge of -Christ is also given in their sacraments and figures, as in the immolation of’ the lamb, and other -symbolic sacraments of the law: “The law has only a shadow of the good things to come” (Heb -10:1). And so, because “the Scriptures of the Old Testament gave much testimony about Christ, -the Apostle says: “He promised the Good News before, through his prophets in the holy -Scriptures; the Good News of his Son, a descendant of David in his human nature” (Rom 1:2).</p> -<p>824 The fruit which you think you have in the Scriptures, that is, eternal life, you will not be able -to obtain, because in not believing the testimonies of the Scriptures about me, <span style="font-weight: bold">you are unwilling -to come to me, </span>i.e., you do not wish to believe in me, in whom the fruit of these Scriptures -exists, <span style="font-weight: bold">in order to possess that life </span>in me, the life which I give to those who believe in me: “I -give them eternal life” (below 10:28); “Wisdom infuses life into her children” (Sir 4:12); “He -who finds me will find life, and will have salvation from the Lord” (Prv 8:35).</p> -<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> -<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 7</span></p> -<BLOCKQUOTE><p style="margin-left: 0.5in">41 “Praise from men I do not need, -<br>42 but I know you, -<br>and you do not have the love of God in your hearts. -<br>43 I have come in my Father’s name, -<br>and yet you do not accept me. -<br>If someone else came in his own name, -<br>you would be accepting him. -<br>44 How can people like you believe, -<br>when you crave praise from each other, -<br>and yet not even ask for that one praise -<br>which is from God alone? -<br>45 Do not think that I will accuse you -<br>before my Father. -<br>The one who accuses you is Moses, -<br>in whom you place your trust. -<br>46 If you believed Moses, -<br>you would perhaps believe me as well, -<br>for it was about me that he wrote. -<br>47 But if you do not believe in his written statements, -<BR>how will you believe in my spoken words?”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> -<p>825 After God confirmed the greatness of his power by the testimonies of men, of’God, and of’ -the Scriptures, he here rebukes the Jews for being slow to believe. Now the Jews persecuted -Christ on two grounds: for breaking the Sabbath, by which he seemed to go against the law, and -for saying that he is the Son of God, by which he seemed to go against God. Thus they persecuted -him on account of their reverence for God and their zeal for the law. And so our Lord wishes to -show that their persecution of him was really inspired not by these motives, but by contrary +<p>801 Next, he presents these testimonies: first, a human +testimony; secondly, a divine testimony. He does two things about +the first. First, he mentions the testimony of John; secondly, he +tells why this testimony was given (v 34). With respect to the +first he does two things. First, he brings in the testimony; +secondly, he commends it (v 32).</p> +<p>802 He brings on the witness when he says: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">But there is someone else who testifies on my +behalf.</span> This is, in the opinion of Chrysostom, John the +Baptist, of whom we read above: “There was a man sent by God, +whose name was John. He came as a witness, that he might bear +witness to the light” (1:6).</p> +<p>803 He commends John’s testimony on two grounds: first, +because of its truth; secondly, because of its authority, for the +Jews had sought it (v 33).</p> +<p>804 He commends his testimony because of its truth, saying: +<span style="font-weight: bold">And I know,</span> from certain +experience, that the witness he, that is, John, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">bears on my behalf is true.</span> His father, +Zechariah, had prophesied this of him: “You will go before +the face of the Lord to prepare his way, to give his people a +knowledge of salvation” (Lk 1:76). Now it is obvious that +false testimony is not a testimony that saves, because lying is a +cause of death: “A lying mouth kills the soul” (Wis +1:11). Therefore, if John’s testimony was for the purpose of +giving knowledge of salvation to his people, his testimony is +true.</p> +<p>805 The Gloss has a different explanation of this: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">If I were to bear witness to myself, my +testimony would not be valid.</span> For above, Christ was +referring to himself as God, but here he is referring to himself as +a man. And the meaning is: If I, namely, a man, were to bear +witness to myself, i.e., apart from God, that is, which God the +Father does not certify, then it follows that <span style= +"font-weight: bold">my testimony would not be valid,</span> for +human speech has no truth unless it is supported by God, according +to: “God is true, but every man is a liar” (Rom 3:4). +Thus, if we take Christ as a man separated from the Deity and not +in conformity with it, we find a lie both in his essence and in his +words: “Although I bear witness to myself, my testimony is +true” (below 8:14); “I am not alone, because the Father +is with me” (below 16:32). And so, because he was not alone +but with the Father, his testimony is true.</p> +<p>Accordingly, to show that his testimony is true, not in virute +of his humanity considered in itself, but in so far as it is united +to his divinity and to the Word of God, he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">But there is someone else who testifies on my +behalf</span>: not John, but the Father, according to this +explanation. Because if the testimony of Christ as man is not of +itself true and productive, much less is the testimony of John. +Therefore, the testimony of Christ is not verified by the testimony +of John, but by the testimony of the Father. So this someone else +who testifies is understood to be the Father. <span style= +"font-weight: bold">And I know that the witness he bears on my +behalf is true</span>, for he is truth: “God is light, +“‘ i.e., truth, “and in him there is no +darkness,” i.e., lie (1 Jn 1:5).</p> +<p>The first explanation, which is that given by Chrysostom, is +nearer to the letter of the text.</p> +<p>806 He also commends the testimony of John by reason of its +authority, because it was sought after by the Jews, saying: +<span style="font-weight: bold">You sent [messengers] to +John.</span> As if to say: I know that his testimony is true and +you should not reject it, because the great authority John enjoyed +among you led you to seek his testimony about me; and you would not +have done this if you did not think that he was worthy of belief: +“The Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to +him” (above 1:19). And on this occasion, John bore witness, +not to himself, but <span style="font-weight: bold">to the +truth</span>, i.e., to me. As a friend of the truth, he bore +testimony to the truth, which is Christ: “He declared openly, +and did not deny, and stated clearly, ‘I am not the +Messiah’” (above 1:20).</p> +<p>807 Then (v 34), he gives the reason why an appeal was made to +the testimony of John. First, he excludes a supposed reason. Next, +he presents the true reason (v 34b).</p> +<p>808 Someone might think that John’s testimony was brought +in to assure them about Christ, on the ground that Christ’s +own testimony was not sufficient. He excludes this reason when he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof +from men</span>. Here we should note that sometimes in the sciences +a thing is proved by something else which is more evident to us, +but which is less evident in itself; and at other times a thing is +proved by something else which is more evident in itself and +absolutely. Now, in this case, the issue is to prove that Christ is +God. And, although the truth of Christ is, in itself and +absolutely, more evident, yet it is proved by the testimony of +John, which was better known to the Jews. So Christ, of himself, +did not have any need of John’s testimony; and this is what +he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof +from men</span>.</p> +<p>809 But this seems to conflict with: “You are my +witnesses, said the Lord” (Is 40:10); and with “You +will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all of Judea and Samaria, +and to the remotest part of the world” (Acts 1:8). So how can +he say: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof +from men</span>.</p> +<p>This can be understood in two ways. In the first way, the sense +is: <span style="font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof from +men</span>, as relying on it alone; but I have stronger testimony, +that is, divine testimony: “For me, it does not matter much +if I am judged by you” (1 Cor 4:3); “You know that I +have not desired the day of man,” i.e., human glory (Jer +17:16).</p> +<p>Another interpretation is: <span style="font-weight: bold">I +myself do not need proof from men</span>, insofar as the one giving +witness is a man, but insofar as he is enlightened by God in order +to testify: “There was a man sent by God, whose name was +John” (above 1:6); “We did not seek glory from +men” (1 Thes 2:6); “1 do not seek my own glory” +(below 8:50). And so I receive the testimony of John not just as a +man, but insofar as he was sent and enlightened by God in order to +testify.</p> +<p>A third explanation, and a better one, is: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">I myself do not need proof from men</span>, +i.e., human testimony. As far as I am concerned, I receive my +authority from no one but God, who proves that I am great.</p> +<p>810 Next (v 34b), he gives the real reason for appealing to +John’s testimony. First, he states the reason. Secondly, he +explains it. The reason for appealing to this testimony was so that +the Jews might be saved by believing in Christ, and this because of +John’s testimony. Thus he says: I do not need John’s +testimony for my sake, <span style="font-weight: bold">but I say +this in order that you may be saved:</span> “He desires the +salvation of’ all men” (1 Tim 2:4). “Christ came +into this world to save sinners” (1 Tim 1:15).</p> +<p>811 He explains his statement, in order that you may be saved: +that is, because I am appealing to testimony you have accepted. And +so he mentions that John was accepted by them: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">He was a lamp, blazing and burning +brightly.</span> First, he states that John was a witness accepted +on his own merits. Secondly, he mentions to what degree he was +accepted by them (v 35b).</p> +<p>812 Three things perfected John and show that he was a witness +accepted in his own right. The first concerns the condition of his +nature, and he refers to this when he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">He was a lamp</span>. The second concerns the +perfection of his love, because he was a <span style= +"font-weight: bold">blazing</span> lamp. The third is related to +the perfection of his understanding, because he was a lamp that was +<span style="font-weight: bold">burning brightly.</span></p> +<p>John was perfect in his nature because he was a lamp, i.e., +enriched by grace and illumined by the light of the Word of God. +Now a lamp differs from a light: for a light radiates light of +itself, but a lamp does not give light of itself, but by +participating in the light. Now the true light is Christ: “He +was the true light, which enlightens every man coming into this +world” (above 1:9). John, however, was not a light, as we +read in the same place, but a lamp, because he was enlightened +“in order to bear witness to the light” (above 1:8), by +leading men to Christ. We read of this lamp: “I have prepared +a lamp for my anointed” (Ps 131:17).</p> +<p>Further, he was blazing and impassioned in his affections, so he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">blazing</span>. For some +people are lamps only as to their office or rank, but they are +snuffed out in their affections: for as a lamp cannot give light +unless there is a fire blazing within it, so a spiritual lamp does +not give any light unless it is first set ablaze and burns with the +fire of love. Therefore, to be ablaze comes first, and the giving +of light depends on it, because knowledge of the truth is given due +to the blazing of love: “If any one loves me, he will keep my +word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and +make our home with him” (below 14:23); and “I have +called you friends, because everything I have heard from my Father +I have made known to you” (below 15:15); “You who fear +the Lord, love him, and your hearts will be enlightened” (Sir +2:20).</p> +<p>The two characteristics of fire are that it both blazes and +shines. Its blazing signifies love for three reasons. First, +because fire is the most active of all bodies; so too is the warmth +of love (charity), so much so that nothing can withstand its force: +“The love of Christ spurs us on” (2 Cor 5:14). +Secondly, because just as fire, because it is very volatile, causes +great unrest, so also this love of charity makes a person restless +until he achieves his objective: “Its light is fire and +flame” (Sg 8:6). Thirdly, just as fire is inclined to move +upward, so too is charity; so much so that it joins us to God: +“He who abides in love abides in God, and God in him” +(1Jn 4:16).</p> +<p>Finally, John had an intellect that was <span style= +"font-weight: bold">burning brightly.</span> First, it was bright +within, because of his knowledge of the truth: “The Lord will +fill your soul with brightness,” i.e., he will make it shine +(Is 58:11). Secondly, it was bright without, because of his +preaching: “You will shine in the world among them like +stars, containing the word of life” (Phil 2:15). Thirdly, it +was bright because it manifested good works: “Let your light +so shine before men that they may see your good works” (Mt +5:16).</p> +<p>813 And so, because John was of himself so acceptable—for +he was a lamp, not smothered out but blazing, not dark but burning +brightly—he deserved to be accepted by you, as indeed he was, +because <span style="font-weight: bold">for a time you yourselves +exulted in his light.</span> He fittingly links their exulting or +rejoicing with light; because a man rejoices most is that which +most pleases him. And among physical things nothing is more +pleasant than light, according to: “It is a delight for the +eyes to see the sun” (Sir 11:7). He says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">you yourselves exulted in his light,</span> +i.e., you rested in John and put your end in him, thinking that he +was the Messiah. But you did this only <span style= +"font-weight: bold">for a time,</span> because you wavered on this; +for when you saw that John was leading men to another, and not to +himself, you turned away from him. Thus we read in Matthew (21:32) +that the Jews did not believe in John. They belonged to that group +referred to by Matthew (13:21 ) as believing “for a +while.”</p> +<p>814 Then (v 36), he presents the divine testimony. First, he +mentions its greatness; and then he continues on to describe +it.</p> +<p>815 He says: I do not need proof from men for my sake, but for +your sake, for <span style="font-weight: bold">I have testimony +that is greater than that of John,</span> that is, the testimony of +God, which is greater than the testimony of John: “If we +receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is +greater” (1 Jn 5:9), It is greater, I say, because of its +greater authority, greater knowledge, and infallible truth, for God +cannot deceive: “God is not like man, a liar” (Nm +23:19).</p> +<p>816 God bore witness to Christ in three ways: by works, by +himself, and by the Scriptures. First, he mentions his witness as +given by the working of miracles; secondly, the way God gave +witness by himself (v 37); thirdly, the witness given through the +Scriptures (v 39).</p> +<p>817 He says first: <span style="font-weight: bold">I have +testimony that is greater than that of John,</span> that is, my +works, i.e., the working of miracles, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the very works which my Father has given me to +perform.</span> We should point out that it is natural for man to +learn of the power and natures of things from their actions, and +therefore our Lord fittingly says that the sort of person he is can +be learned through the works he does. So, since he performed divine +works by his own power, we should believe that he has divine power +within him: “If I had not done among them the works which no +one else did, they would not have sin,” that is, the sin of +unbelief (below 15:24). And so he leads them to a knowledge of +himself by appealing to his works, saying, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the very works which my Father has given +me</span> in the Word, through an eternal generation, by giving me +a power equal to his own. Or we could say, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the very works which my Father has given +me,</span> in my conception, by making me one person who is both +God and man, <span style="font-weight: bold">to perform,</span> +i.e., to perform them by my own power. He says this to distinguish +himself from those who do not perforrn miracles by their own power +but have to obtain it as a favor from God; thus Peter says: +“In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth: stand up” +(Acts 3:6). Thus it was God, and not themselves, who accomplished +these works; but Christ accomplished them by his own power: +“Lazarus, come forth,” as John reports below (11:43). +Accordingly, <span style="font-weight: bold">those works that I +myself perform—they bear witness to me;</span> “If you +do not believe me, at least believe my works” (below 10:38). +We see from Mark (16:20) that God bears witness by the working of +miracles: “The Lord worked with them and confirmed the word +by the signs that followed.”</p> +<p>818 Then (v 37), he presents the second way God bore witness to +Christ, namely, by himself. First, he mentions the way; secondly, +he shows that they were not able to receive this testimony.</p> +<p>819 He says: It is not only the works which my Father has given +me to perform that bear witness to me, but <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the Father who sent me has himself given +testimony on my behalf:</span> in the Jordan, when Christ was +baptized (Mt 3:17); and on the mountain, when Christ was +transfigured (Mt 17:5). For on both these occasions the voice of +the Father was heard: “This is my beloved Son.” And so +they should believe in Christ, as the true and natural Son of God: +“This is the testimony of God: he has borne witness to his +Son” ( 1 Jn 5:9). Consequently, anyone who does not believe +that he is the Son of God, does not believe in the testimony of +God.</p> +<p>820 Someone could say that God also gave testimony to others by +himself: for example, to Moses, on the mountain, with whom God +spoke while others were present. We, however, never heard his +testimony, as the Lord says: <span style="font-weight: bold">you +have neither heard his voice.</span> On the other hand, we read in +Deuteronomy (4:33): Did it ever happen before that the people heard +the voice of God speaking from the midst of fire, as you heard, and +have lived?” Then how can Christ say: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">you have neither heard his voice?</span></p> +<p>I reply, according to Chrysostom, that the Lord wishes to show +those established in a philosophical frame of mind that God gives +testimony to someone in two ways, namely, sensibly and +intelligibly. Sensibly, as by a sensible voice only; and in this +way he gave witness to Moses on Mount Sinai: “You heard his +voice, and saw no form at all” (Dt 4:12). Likewise, he gives +testimony by a sensible form, as he appeared to Abraham (Gn 26), +and to Isaiah: “I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty +throne” (Is 6:1). However, in these visions, neither the +audible voice nor the visible figure were like anything in the +animal kingdom, except efficiently, in the sense that these were +formed by God. For since God is a spirit, he neither emits audible +sounds nor can he be portrayed as a figure. But he does bear +testimony in an intelligible manner by inspiring in the hearts of +certain persons what they ought to believe and to hold: “I +will hear what the Lord God will speak within me” (Ps 84:9); +“I will lead her into the wilderness and there I will speak +to her heart,” as we read in Hosea (2:14).</p> +<p>Now you were able to receive the testimony given in the first of +these ways; and this is not surprising, because they were the words +and image of God only efficiently, as was said. But they were not +able to receive the testimony given in that intelligible voice; so +he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">you have neither heard his +voice,</span> i.e., you were not among those who shared in it. +“Everyone who has heard the Father and has learned, comes to +me” (below 6:45). But you do not come to me. Therefore, +<span style="font-weight: bold">you have neither heard his voice +nor seen his image,</span> i.e., you do not have his intelligible +testimony. Hence he adds: <span style="font-weight: bold">and you +do not have his word abiding in your hearts,</span> i.e., you do +not have his word that is inwardly inspired. And the reason is, +<span style="font-weight: bold">for you do not believe in him whom +he,</span> the Father, <span style="font-weight: bold">has +sent</span>. For the word of God leads to Christ, since Christ +himself is the natural Word of God. But every word inspired by God +is a certain participated likeness of that Word. Therefore, since +every participated likeness leads to its original, it is clear that +every word inspired by God leads to Christ. And so, because you are +not led to me, <span style="font-weight: bold">you do not have his +word,</span> i.e., the inspired word of God, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">abiding in your hearts.</span> “He who +does not believe in the Son of God does not have life abiding in +him,” as it says below (sic). He says <span style= +"font-weight: bold">abiding,</span> because although there is no +one who does not have some truth from God, they alone have the +truth and the word abiding in them whose knowledge has progressed +to the point where they have reached a knowledge of the true and +natural Word.</p> +<p>821 Or we could say that, <span style="font-weight: bold">you +have neither heard his voice,</span> can be taken as showing the +three ways in which God reveals things. This is done either by a +sensible voice, as he bore witness to Christ in the Jordan and on +the mountain, as in 2 Peter (1:16): “We were eyewitnesses of +his greatness. For he received honor and glory from God the Father, +when a voice came from the heavens.” And the Jews did not +hear this. Or, God reveals things through a vision of his essence, +which he reveals to the blessed. And they did not see this, because +“while we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord” +(2 Cor 5:6). Thirdly, it is accomplished by an interior word +through an inspiration; and the Jews did not have this either.</p> +<p>822 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Search +the Scriptures,</span> he gives the third way in which God bore +witness to Christ, through the Scriptures. First, he mentions the +testimony of the Scriptures. Secondly, he shows that they were not +able to gather the fruit of this testimony (v 40).</p> +<p>823 He says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Search the +Scriptures.</span> As if to say: You do not have the word of God in +your hearts, but in the Scriptures; therefore, you must seek for it +elsewhere than in your hearts. Hence, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Search the Scriptures,</span> that is, the Old +Testament, for the faith of Christ was contained in the Old +Testament, but not on the surface, for it lay hidden in its depths, +under shadowy symbols: “Even to this day, when Moses is read, +a veil is over their hearts” (2 Cor 3:15). Thus he +significantly says, Search, probe into the depths: “If you +search for her [wisdom] like money, and dig for her like a +treasure, you will understand the fear of the Lord and will find +the knowledge of God” (Prv 2:4); “Give me understanding +and I will search your commandments” (Ps 118:34).</p> +<p>The reason why you should search them I take from your own +opinion, because <span style="font-weight: bold">you think you have +eternal life in them,</span> since we read in Ezekiel (18:19): +“He who has kept my commands will live.” But you are +mistaken; because although the precepts of the old law are living, +they do not contain life in themselves. They are said to be living +only to the extent that they lead to me, the Christ. Yet you use +them as though they contained life in themselves, and in this you +are mistaken, for they bear witness to me, i.e., they are living to +the extent that they lead to a knowledge of me. And they lead to a +knowledge of me either by plain prophecies, as in Isaiah (7:14): +“A virgin will conceive.” or in Deuteronomy (18:15): +“The Lord your God will raise up a prophet for you.”; +and so Acts (10:43) says: “All the prophets bear witness to +him.” The Scriptures also lead to a knowledge of Christ +through the symbolic actions of the prophets; thus we read: +“I have used resemblences in the ministry of the +prophets” (Hos 12:10). Knowledge of Christ is also given in +their sacraments and figures, as in the immolation of’ the +lamb, and other symbolic sacraments of the law: “The law has +only a shadow of the good things to come” (Heb 10:1). And so, +because “the Scriptures of the Old Testament gave much +testimony about Christ, the Apostle says: “He promised the +Good News before, through his prophets in the holy Scriptures; the +Good News of his Son, a descendant of David in his human +nature” (Rom 1:2).</p> +<p>824 The fruit which you think you have in the Scriptures, that +is, eternal life, you will not be able to obtain, because in not +believing the testimonies of the Scriptures about me, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">you are unwilling to come to me,</span> i.e., +you do not wish to believe in me, in whom the fruit of these +Scriptures exists, <span style="font-weight: bold">in order to +possess that life</span> in me, the life which I give to those who +believe in me: “I give them eternal life” (below +10:28); “Wisdom infuses life into her children” (Sir +4:12); “He who finds me will find life, and will have +salvation from the Lord” (Prv 8:35).</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> + </p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">LECTURE 7</span></p> +<blockquote> +<p style="margin-left: 0.5in">41 “Praise from men I do not +need,<br /> +42 but I know you,<br /> +and you do not have the love of God in your hearts.<br /> +43 I have come in my Father’s name,<br /> +and yet you do not accept me.<br /> +If someone else came in his own name,<br /> +you would be accepting him.<br /> +44 How can people like you believe,<br /> +when you crave praise from each other,<br /> +and yet not even ask for that one praise<br /> +which is from God alone?<br /> +45 Do not think that I will accuse you<br /> +before my Father.<br /> +The one who accuses you is Moses,<br /> +in whom you place your trust.<br /> +46 If you believed Moses,<br /> +you would perhaps believe me as well,<br /> +for it was about me that he wrote.<br /> +47 But if you do not believe in his written statements,<br /> +how will you believe in my spoken words?”</p> +</blockquote> +<p>825 After God confirmed the greatness of his power by the +testimonies of men, of’God, and of’ the Scriptures, he +here rebukes the Jews for being slow to believe. Now the Jews +persecuted Christ on two grounds: for breaking the Sabbath, by +which he seemed to go against the law, and for saying that he is +the Son of God, by which he seemed to go against God. Thus they +persecuted him on account of their reverence for God and their zeal +for the law. And so our Lord wishes to show that their persecution +of him was really inspired not by these motives, but by contrary reasons.</p> -<p>He first shows that the cause of their unbelief was their lack of reverence for God. Secondly, that -another cause of their unbelief was their lack of reverence for Moses (v 45). As to the first he -does two things. First, he shows their irreverence for God. Secondly, he shows that this is the -cause of their unbelief (v 44). Concerning the first he does two things. First, he mentions their -lack of reverence for God. Secondly, he makes this obvious by a sign (v 43). With respect to the -first he does two things. First, he rejects what they might have assumed to be his intention, from -what he had said before. Secondly, he presents his real intention (v 42).</p> -<p>826 The Jews might have assumed that Christ was seeking some kind of praise from men, since -he had reminded them of so many witnesses to himself, as John, God, his own works, and the -testimony of the Scriptures. Against this thought he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Praise from men I do not need, </span>i.e., -I do not seek praise from men; for I have not come to be an example of one seeking human glory: -“We did not seek glory from men” (1 Thes 2:6). Or, <span style="font-weight: bold">Praise from men I do not need</span>, i.e., I do -not need human praise, because from eternity I have glory with the Father: “Glorify me, Father, -with the glory I had before the world was made” (below 17:5). For I have not come to be -glorified by men, but rather to glorify them, since all glory proceeds from me (Wis 7:25) -[“Wisdom is a pure emanation of the glory of the almighty God.”] It is through this wisdom that -I have glory. God is said to be praised and glorified by men—“Glorify the Lord as much as you -are able; he will still surpass even that” (Sir 43:30)—not that he might become by this more -glorious, but so that he might appear glorious among us.</p> -<p>827 Thus Christ presented the various testimonies to himself not for the reason they thought, but -for another one: because <span style="font-weight: bold">I know you, </span>i.e., I have made known about you, that <span style="font-weight: bold">you do not have -the love of God in your hearts, </span>although you pretend to have it. And so you are not persecuting -me because of your love for God. You would be persecuting me for the love of God if God and -the Scriptures did not bear witness to me; but God himself bears. witness to me by himself, his -works and in the Scriptures, as has been said. Consequently, if you truly loved God, then so far -from rejecting me, you would come to me. You, therefore, do not love God.</p> -<p>Another interpretation would be this. It is as though he were saying: I have not brought in these -witnesses because I wanted your praise; but I know you do not love God and your waywardness -makes me sad, and I want to lead you back to the way of truth: “Now they have seen and hated -both me and my Father” (below 15:24); “The pride of those who hate you continuously rises,” -as the Psalm (73:23) says.</p> -<p>828 Here we should point out that God cannot be hated in himself by anyone, nor can he be hated -with respect to all his effects, since every good in things comes from God, and it is impossible -for anyone to hate all good, for he will at least love existence and life. But someone may hate -some effect of God, insofar as this is opposed to what he desires: for example, he might hate -punishment, and things of that sort. It is from this point of view that God is said to be hated.</p> -<p>829 Then (v 43), he gives a sign that they do not love God. First, a present sign; secondly, a -future sign (v 43b).</p> -<p>830 The present sign concerns his own coming; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">I have come in my Father’s name. -</span>As if to say: What I say is obvious, for if one loves his Lord, it is clear that he will honor and -receive one who comes from him, and seek to honor him. But <span style="font-weight: bold">I have come in my Father’s -name, </span>and I make his name known to the world: “I have made your name known to those you -have given me” (below 17:6), <span style="font-weight: bold">and yet you do not accept me. </span>Therefore, you do not love him. -The Son is said to make his Father known to men because, although the Father, as God, was -known—“God is known in Judah” (Ps 75:1)—yet he was not known as the natural Father of the -Son before Christ came. Thus Solomon asked: “What is his name? And what is the name of his -son?” Prv 30:4).</p> -<p>831 The future sign concerns the coming of the Antichrist. For the Jews could say: Although you -come in his name, we have not accepted you, because we will not accept anyone but God the -Father. The Lord speaks against this, and says that it cannot be, because you will accept another, -who will come, not in the Father’s name, but in his own name; and what is more, he will come, -not in the name of the Father, but <span style="font-weight: bold">in his own name, </span>precisely because he will not seek the glory -of the Father but his own. And whatever he does, he will attribute it, not to the Father, but to -himself: “who opposes and is exalted above all that is called God, or is worshipped” (2 Thes 2:4). -<span style="font-weight: bold">You would be accepting him; </span>and so the Apostle continues in the same letter: “God will send -them a misleading influence so that they might believe what is false” (2 Thes 2:11). And this, -because they did not accept the true teaching, that they might be saved. So the Gloss says: -“Because the Jews were unwilling to accept Christ, the penalty for this sin will be, fittingly -enough, that they will receive the Antichrist; with the result that those who were unwilling to -believe the truth, will believe a lie.”</p> -<p>According to Augustine, however, we can understand this text as applying to heretics and false -teachers: who spread a teaching that comes from their own hearts and not from the mouth of -God, and who praise themselves and despise the name of God. Of such persons it is written: -“You have heard that the Antichrist is coming; and now many antichrists have appeared” (1 Jn -2:18). So it is clear that your persecution of me does not spring from your love for God, but from -your hatred and envy of him. And this was the reason why they did not believe.</p> -<p>832 He concludes: <span style="font-weight: bold">How can people like you believe, when you crave praise from each other, -</span>i.e., human praise, <span style="font-weight: bold">and yet not even ask for that one praise which is from God alone? </span>which -is true glory. The reason they could not believe in Christ was that, since their proud minds were -craving their own glory and praise, they considered themselves superior to others in glory, and -regarded it as a disgrace to believe in Christ, who seemed common and poor. And this was why -they could not believe in him. The one who can believe in Christ is the person of humble heart, -who seeks the glory of God alone, and who strives to please him. And so we read: “Many of the -leaders 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). We can see from this just how dangerous -vainglory is. For this reason Cicero says: “Let a man beware of that glory that robs him of all -freedom; that freedom for which a man of great spirit should risk everything.” And the Gloss -says: “It is a great vice to boast and to strive for human praise: to desire that others think you -have what you really do not have.”</p> -<p>833 Then (v 45), he shows that they do not have zeal for Moses. First, how Moses was against -them. Secondly, he gives the reason for this opposition (v 46). As to the first he does two things -First, he rejects their false zeal; secondly, he shows them true zeal, <span style="font-weight: bold">The one who accuses you -is Moses.</span></p> -<p>834 As to the first he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not think that I will accuse you before my Father. </span>There are -three reasons for his saying this. First, the Son of God did not come into the world to condemn -the world, but to save it. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not think </span>that I have come to condemn, I have come to -free: “God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world,” that is, to condemn the world, -“but that the world might be saved through him” (above 3:17). And so the blood of Christ cries -out, not to accuse, but to forgive: “We have the blood of Christ, crying out better than that of -Abel” (Heb 12:24), whose blood cried out to accuse; “Who will accuse God’s elect? It is Christ -who justifies. Who is it, then, who will condemn?” (Rom 8:33). As to his second reason for -saying this, he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not think that I will accuse you before my Father, </span>because I will not -be the one to accuse you, but to judge you: “The Father has given all judgment to the Son” (above -5:22). The third reason is: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not think that I, </span>i.e., I alone, <span style="font-weight: bold">will accuse you before my Father -</span>for what you are doing to me; for even Moses will accuse you for not believing him in the things -he said of me.</p> -<p>835 Consequently he adds: <span style="font-weight: bold">The one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you place your trust, -</span>because you believe you are saved through his precepts. Moses accuses them in two ways. -Materially, because they deserved to be accused for transgressing his commands: “Those who -have sinned under the law, will be judged by the law” (Rom 2:12). Again, Moses accuses them -because he and the other saints will have authority in the judgment: “The two-edged swords will -be in their hands” (Ps 149:6).</p> -<p>836 He presents the reason for this opposition when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">If you believed Moses, you would -perhaps believe me as well, </span>as is clear from “The Lord your God will raise up a prophet for you, -from your nation and your brothers; he will be like me: you will listen to him” (Dt 18:15), and -from all the sacrifices, which were a symbol of Christ. He says, perhaps, to indicate that their will -acts from a free judgment, and not to imply that there is any doubt on the part of God.</p> -<p>837 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But if you do not believe in his written statements, how will you -believe in my spoken words? </span>he gives a sign of this opposition. He does this by comparing two -things, and then denying of the lesser of them what is denied of the greater. First, there is a -comparison between Moses and Christ: for although Christ, absolutely speaking, is greater than -Moses, Moses was the greater in reputation among the Jews. Thus he says: If you do not believe -Moses, you will not believe me either. Secondly, he compares the way in which they presented -their teaching: Moses gave his precepts in a written form; and so they can be studied for a long -time, and are not easily forgotten. Hence they impose a stronger obligation to believe. But Christ -presented his teachings in spoken words. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But if you do not believe in his written -statements, </span>which you have preserved in your <span style="font-weight: bold">books, how will you believe in my spoken -words?</span></p> +<p>He first shows that the cause of their unbelief was their lack +of reverence for God. Secondly, that another cause of their +unbelief was their lack of reverence for Moses (v 45). As to the +first he does two things. First, he shows their irreverence for +God. Secondly, he shows that this is the cause of their unbelief (v +44). Concerning the first he does two things. First, he mentions +their lack of reverence for God. Secondly, he makes this obvious by +a sign (v 43). With respect to the first he does two things. First, +he rejects what they might have assumed to be his intention, from +what he had said before. Secondly, he presents his real intention +(v 42).</p> +<p>826 The Jews might have assumed that Christ was seeking some +kind of praise from men, since he had reminded them of so many +witnesses to himself, as John, God, his own works, and the +testimony of the Scriptures. Against this thought he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">Praise from men I do not +need,</span> i.e., I do not seek praise from men; for I have not +come to be an example of one seeking human glory: “We did not +seek glory from men” (1 Thes 2:6). Or, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Praise from men I do not need</span>, i.e., I +do not need human praise, because from eternity I have glory with +the Father: “Glorify me, Father, with the glory I had before +the world was made” (below 17:5). For I have not come to be +glorified by men, but rather to glorify them, since all glory +proceeds from me (Wis 7:25) [“Wisdom is a pure emanation of +the glory of the almighty God.”] It is through this wisdom +that I have glory. God is said to be praised and glorified by +men—“Glorify the Lord as much as you are able; he will +still surpass even that” (Sir 43:30)—not that he might +become by this more glorious, but so that he might appear glorious +among us.</p> +<p>827 Thus Christ presented the various testimonies to himself not +for the reason they thought, but for another one: because +<span style="font-weight: bold">I know you,</span> i.e., I have +made known about you, that <span style="font-weight: bold">you do +not have the love of God in your hearts,</span> although you +pretend to have it. And so you are not persecuting me because of +your love for God. You would be persecuting me for the love of God +if God and the Scriptures did not bear witness to me; but God +himself bears. witness to me by himself, his works and in the +Scriptures, as has been said. Consequently, if you truly loved God, +then so far from rejecting me, you would come to me. You, +therefore, do not love God.</p> +<p>Another interpretation would be this. It is as though he were +saying: I have not brought in these witnesses because I wanted your +praise; but I know you do not love God and your waywardness makes +me sad, and I want to lead you back to the way of truth: “Now +they have seen and hated both me and my Father” (below +15:24); “The pride of those who hate you continuously +rises,” as the Psalm (73:23) says.</p> +<p>828 Here we should point out that God cannot be hated in himself +by anyone, nor can he be hated with respect to all his effects, +since every good in things comes from God, and it is impossible for +anyone to hate all good, for he will at least love existence and +life. But someone may hate some effect of God, insofar as this is +opposed to what he desires: for example, he might hate punishment, +and things of that sort. It is from this point of view that God is +said to be hated.</p> +<p>829 Then (v 43), he gives a sign that they do not love God. +First, a present sign; secondly, a future sign (v 43b).</p> +<p>830 The present sign concerns his own coming; so he says, +<span style="font-weight: bold">I have come in my Father’s +name.</span> As if to say: What I say is obvious, for if one loves +his Lord, it is clear that he will honor and receive one who comes +from him, and seek to honor him. But <span style= +"font-weight: bold">I have come in my Father’s name,</span> +and I make his name known to the world: “I have made your +name known to those you have given me” (below 17:6), +<span style="font-weight: bold">and yet you do not accept +me.</span> Therefore, you do not love him. The Son is said to make +his Father known to men because, although the Father, as God, was +known—“God is known in Judah” (Ps 75:1)—yet +he was not known as the natural Father of the Son before Christ +came. Thus Solomon asked: “What is his name? And what is the +name of his son?” Prv 30:4).</p> +<p>831 The future sign concerns the coming of the Antichrist. For +the Jews could say: Although you come in his name, we have not +accepted you, because we will not accept anyone but God the Father. +The Lord speaks against this, and says that it cannot be, because +you will accept another, who will come, not in the Father’s +name, but in his own name; and what is more, he will come, not in +the name of the Father, but <span style="font-weight: bold">in his +own name,</span> precisely because he will not seek the glory of +the Father but his own. And whatever he does, he will attribute it, +not to the Father, but to himself: “who opposes and is +exalted above all that is called God, or is worshipped” (2 +Thes 2:4). <span style="font-weight: bold">You would be accepting +him;</span> and so the Apostle continues in the same letter: +“God will send them a misleading influence so that they might +believe what is false” (2 Thes 2:11). And this, because they +did not accept the true teaching, that they might be saved. So the +Gloss says: “Because the Jews were unwilling to accept +Christ, the penalty for this sin will be, fittingly enough, that +they will receive the Antichrist; with the result that those who +were unwilling to believe the truth, will believe a lie.”</p> +<p>According to Augustine, however, we can understand this text as +applying to heretics and false teachers: who spread a teaching that +comes from their own hearts and not from the mouth of God, and who +praise themselves and despise the name of God. Of such persons it +is written: “You have heard that the Antichrist is coming; +and now many antichrists have appeared” (1 Jn 2:18). So it is +clear that your persecution of me does not spring from your love +for God, but from your hatred and envy of him. And this was the +reason why they did not believe.</p> +<p>832 He concludes: <span style="font-weight: bold">How can people +like you believe, when you crave praise from each other,</span> +i.e., human praise, <span style="font-weight: bold">and yet not +even ask for that one praise which is from God alone?</span> which +is true glory. The reason they could not believe in Christ was +that, since their proud minds were craving their own glory and +praise, they considered themselves superior to others in glory, and +regarded it as a disgrace to believe in Christ, who seemed common +and poor. And this was why they could not believe in him. The one +who can believe in Christ is the person of humble heart, who seeks +the glory of God alone, and who strives to please him. And so we +read: “Many of the leaders 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). We can see from +this just how dangerous vainglory is. For this reason Cicero says: +“Let a man beware of that glory that robs him of all freedom; +that freedom for which a man of great spirit should risk +everything.” And the Gloss says: “It is a great vice to +boast and to strive for human praise: to desire that others think +you have what you really do not have.”</p> +<p>833 Then (v 45), he shows that they do not have zeal for Moses. +First, how Moses was against them. Secondly, he gives the reason +for this opposition (v 46). As to the first he does two things +First, he rejects their false zeal; secondly, he shows them true +zeal, <span style="font-weight: bold">The one who accuses you is +Moses.</span></p> +<p>834 As to the first he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Do +not think that I will accuse you before my Father.</span> There are +three reasons for his saying this. First, the Son of God did not +come into the world to condemn the world, but to save it. So he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Do not think</span> that I +have come to condemn, I have come to free: “God did not send +his Son into the world to judge the world,” that is, to +condemn the world, “but that the world might be saved through +him” (above 3:17). And so the blood of Christ cries out, not +to accuse, but to forgive: “We have the blood of Christ, +crying out better than that of Abel” (Heb 12:24), whose blood +cried out to accuse; “Who will accuse God’s elect? It +is Christ who justifies. Who is it, then, who will condemn?” +(Rom 8:33). As to his second reason for saying this, he says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">Do not think that I will accuse you +before my Father,</span> because I will not be the one to accuse +you, but to judge you: “The Father has given all judgment to +the Son” (above 5:22). The third reason is: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">Do not think that I,</span> i.e., I alone, +<span style="font-weight: bold">will accuse you before my +Father</span> for what you are doing to me; for even Moses will +accuse you for not believing him in the things he said of me.</p> +<p>835 Consequently he adds: <span style="font-weight: bold">The +one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you place your trust,</span> +because you believe you are saved through his precepts. Moses +accuses them in two ways. Materially, because they deserved to be +accused for transgressing his commands: “Those who have +sinned under the law, will be judged by the law” (Rom 2:12). +Again, Moses accuses them because he and the other saints will have +authority in the judgment: “The two-edged swords will be in +their hands” (Ps 149:6).</p> +<p>836 He presents the reason for this opposition when he says: +<span style="font-weight: bold">If you believed Moses, you would +perhaps believe me as well,</span> as is clear from “The Lord +your God will raise up a prophet for you, from your nation and your +brothers; he will be like me: you will listen to him” (Dt +18:15), and from all the sacrifices, which were a symbol of Christ. +He says, perhaps, to indicate that their will acts from a free +judgment, and not to imply that there is any doubt on the part of +God.</p> +<p>837 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But if +you do not believe in his written statements, how will you believe +in my spoken words?</span> he gives a sign of this opposition. He +does this by comparing two things, and then denying of the lesser +of them what is denied of the greater. First, there is a comparison +between Moses and Christ: for although Christ, absolutely speaking, +is greater than Moses, Moses was the greater in reputation among +the Jews. Thus he says: If you do not believe Moses, you will not +believe me either. Secondly, he compares the way in which they +presented their teaching: Moses gave his precepts in a written +form; and so they can be studied for a long time, and are not +easily forgotten. Hence they impose a stronger obligation to +believe. But Christ presented his teachings in spoken words. Thus +he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">But if you do not believe +in his written statements,</span> which you have preserved in your +<span style="font-weight: bold">books, how will you believe in my +spoken words?</span></p> +</blockquote> </body> - </html>