Mercurial > hg > Aquinas
diff john/english/SSJohn.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/SSJohn.html Mon Nov 30 21:59:53 2009 +0000 +++ b/john/english/SSJohn.html Mon Nov 30 22:05:42 2009 +0000 @@ -1,7 +1,13 @@ -<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>Thomas Aquinas: Commentary on the Gospel of John</title> + <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ var gAgent = navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase() var gWindows = ( (gAgent.indexOf( "win" ) != -1 ) || ( gAgent.indexOf( "16bit" ) != -1 ) ) var gIE = ( gAgent.indexOf( "msie" ) != -1 ) @@ -9,73 +15,73 @@ var floatwnd = 0 var WPFootnote1 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p> For a fuller documentation of these facts, see James A. Weisheipl, <i>Friar Thomas d’Aquino: His Life, Thought and\ -Works </i>(Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1974), pp. 246-47, 372, and so forth. See also J. A. Weisheipl. “The\ -Johannine Commentary of Friar Thomas,” <i>Church History, </i>45 (1976), 185-195.</p>\ -</span>' +Works <\/i>(Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1974), pp. 246-47, 372, and so forth. See also J. A. Weisheipl. “The\ +Johannine Commentary of Friar Thomas,” <i>Church History, <\/i>45 (1976), 185-195.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote2 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>Ibid., </i>pp. 145-46.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote2 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>Ibid., <\/i>pp. 145-46.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote3 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>The full text of this allocution is given in <i>AAS</i> 50 (1958), 150-53.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote3 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>The full text of this allocution is given in <i>AAS<\/i> 50 (1958), 150-53.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote4 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Summa theologiae</i>, I, q.1, a.8, ad 2.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote4 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Summa theologiae<\/i>, I, q.1, a.8, ad 2.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote5 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>AAS</i> 35 (1943), 297-325; trans. in <i>The Catholic Mind </i>42<i> </i>(1944), 257-83.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote5 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>AAS<\/i> 35 (1943), 297-325; trans. in <i>The Catholic Mind <\/i>42<i> <\/i>(1944), 257-83.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote6 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Super epistolam ad Hebraeos lectura</i>, cap.1, lect. 4, n. 64. <i>Super Epistolas S. Pauli Lectura</i>, ed. R.\ -Cai (Turin: Marietti, 1953), I, 350a.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote6 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Super epistolam ad Hebraeos lectura<\/i>, cap.1, lect. 4, n. 64. <i>Super Epistolas S. Pauli Lectura<\/i>, ed. R.\ +Cai (Turin: Marietti, 1953), I, 350a.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote7 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>Divino afflante Spiritu, </i>n.63; trans. loc. <i>cit., </i>p. 280.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote7 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>Divino afflante Spiritu, <\/i>n.63; trans. loc. <i>cit., <\/i>p. 280.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote8 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Sum. theol., </i>I, q. 1, a. 10.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote8 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Sum. theol., <\/i>I, q. 1, a. 10.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote9 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>Ibid.</i></p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote9 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p><i>Ibid.<\/i><\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote10 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See J. A. Weisheipl, “The Meaning of <i>Sacra Doctrina </i>in <i>Summa theologiae </i>I, q. 1,” <i>The Thomist, </i>38 (1974), 49-80.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote10 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See J. A. Weisheipl, “The Meaning of <i>Sacra Doctrina <\/i>in <i>Summa theologiae <\/i>I, q. 1,” <i>The Thomist, <\/i>38 (1974), 49-80.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote11 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>Aristotle, <i>Metaphysics </i>I, 2, 982a, l8-19.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote11 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>Aristotle, <i>Metaphysics <\/i>I, 2, 982a, l8-19.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote12 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See <i>Friar Thomas dAquino</i>, pp, 392-93.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote12 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See <i>Friar Thomas dAquino<\/i>, pp, 392-93.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' var WPFootnote13 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>Only the second part of this work has been translated into English—J. B. Collins, <i>Catechetical Instructions of St.\ -Thomas </i>(New York: Wagner 1939; repr. 1953).</p>\ -</span>' +Thomas <\/i>(New York: Wagner 1939; repr. 1953).<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote14 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Catena Aurea,</i>Epistola dedicatoria (Turin:<i> </i>Marietti, 1925) I, 468.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote14 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Catena Aurea,<\/i>Epistola dedicatoria (Turin:<i> <\/i>Marietti, 1925) I, 468.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote15 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Sum. theol., </i>I, q.1, a.3; see note 10 above.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote15 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Sum. theol., <\/i>I, q.1, a.3; see note 10 above.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote16 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See Leo XIII, <i>Providentissimu</i> <i>s Deus </i>(18 Nov 1893) in <i>Acta Leonis XIII</i>, vol. 13, p. 345-46.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote16 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See Leo XIII, <i>Providentissimu<\/i> <i>s Deus <\/i>(18 Nov 1893) in <i>Acta Leonis XIII<\/i>, vol. 13, p. 345-46.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote17 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See <i>Friar Thomas d’Aquino</i>, pp. 164-68.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote17 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>See <i>Friar Thomas d’Aquino<\/i>, pp. 164-68.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote18 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Super Evangelium S. Joannis Lectura</i>,<i> </i>cap.21, lect.6, n.2656, ed. R. Cai (Turin: Marietti 1952), p. 488.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote18 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>St. Thomas, <i>Super Evangelium S. Joannis Lectura<\/i>,<i> <\/i>cap.21, lect.6, n.2656, ed. R. Cai (Turin: Marietti 1952), p. 488.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote19 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>Trent. sess. 4, in Denziger-Schbnmetzer, <i>Enchiridion</i> <i>Symbolorum </i>(1967), n.1501. See the important study of this\ -question in J. R. Geiselmann, <i>Die Heilige Schrift und die Tradition </i>(Freiburg i. Br.: Herder 1962), pp. 108-160.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote19 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>Trent. sess. 4, in Denziger-Schbnmetzer, <i>Enchiridion<\/i> <i>Symbolorum <\/i>(1967), n.1501. See the important study of this\ +question in J. R. Geiselmann, <i>Die Heilige Schrift und die Tradition <\/i>(Freiburg i. Br.: Herder 1962), pp. 108-160.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote20 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>Sess. VIII, <i>Constitutio Dogmatica de divina Revelatione, Dei verbum </i>(18 Nov . 1965), in <i>Constitutiones, Decreta,\ -Declarationes </i>(Vatican 1966), p. 429; see whole of cap. 2.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote20 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>Sess. VIII, <i>Constitutio Dogmatica de divina Revelatione, Dei verbum <\/i>(18 Nov . 1965), in <i>Constitutiones, Decreta,\ +Declarationes <\/i>(Vatican 1966), p. 429; see whole of cap. 2.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' -var WPFootnote21 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>This was the invocation, for example, in the old Dominican rite of the Mass.</p>\ -</span>' +var WPFootnote21 = '<span class="WPNormal"><p>This was the invocation, for example, in the old Dominican rite of the Mass.<\/p>\ +<\/span>' function WPShow( WPid, WPtext ) { @@ -87,11 +93,11 @@ floatwnd = window.open( "", "comment", "toolbars=0,width=600,height=200,resizable=1,scrollbars=1,dependent=1" ); floatwnd.document.open( "text/html", "replace" ); floatwnd.document.write( "<html><head>\r\n" ); - floatwnd.document.write( "<style> p { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; } </style>\r\n" ); - floatwnd.document.write( "</head><body>\r\n" ); + floatwnd.document.write( "<style> p { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; } <\/style>\r\n" ); + floatwnd.document.write( "<\/head><body>\r\n" ); floatwnd.document.write( WPtext ); - floatwnd.document.write( '<br><a href="javascript: self.close()">Close</a>'); - floatwnd.document.write( "</body></html>" ); + floatwnd.document.write( '<br><a href="javascript: self.close()">Close<\/a>'); + floatwnd.document.write( "<\/body><\/html>" ); floatwnd.document.close(); floatwnd.focus(); } @@ -102,929 +108,1370 @@ if( bInlineFloats ) eval( "document.all." + WPid + ".style.visibility = 'hidden'" ); } +//]]> </script> - -<style> +<style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[*/ p { - margin-bottom: 1px + margin-bottom: 1px } span.WPFloatStyle { - visibility: hidden; - position: absolute; - left: 10px; - right: 10px; - background-color: rgb(255, 255, 225); - border-width: 1px; - border-style: solid; - border-color: black; - margin-top: 25px; - padding: 6px; - line-height: normal + visibility: hidden; + position: absolute; + left: 10px; + right: 10px; + background-color: rgb(255, 255, 225); + border-width: 1px; + border-style: solid; + border-color: black; + margin-top: 25px; + padding: 6px; + line-height: normal } +/*]]>*/ </style> </head> -<body><blockquote> -<CENTER><h2>COMMENTARY ON<BR>THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN</span></h2> +<body> +<blockquote> +<center> +<h2>COMMENTARY ON<br /> +THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN</h2> <p>St. Thomas Aquinas</p> -<p><span style="font-weight: bold">Part I: Chapters 1-7</span> -<br>translated by<BR>James A. Weisheipl, O.P. -<br>Magi Books, Inc., Albany, N.Y. -<table cellpadding=10 border=4><tr><td><A HREF="#01">INTRODUCTION</A> -<td align=center><A HREF="#02"><b>PROLOGUE</A><td><a href="JohnApp.htm">APPENDICES</A></table>Chapters: -<table cellpadding=10 border=4><tr><td><A HREF="John1.htm">*1*</A><td><A HREF="John2.htm">*2*</A><td><A HREF="John3.htm">*3*</A><td><A HREF="John4.htm">*4*</A><td><A HREF="John5.htm">*5*</A><td><A HREF="John6.htm">*6*</A><td><A HREF="John7.htm">*7*</A> +<p><span style="font-weight: bold">Part I: Chapters +1-7</span><br /> +translated by<br /> +James A. Weisheipl, O.P.<br /> +Magi Books, Inc., Albany, N.Y.</p> +<table cellpadding="10" border="4"> +<tr> +<td><a href="#01">INTRODUCTION</a></td> +<td align="center"><a href="#02"><b>PROLOGUE</b></a></td> +<td><a href="JohnApp.htm">APPENDICES</a></td> +</tr> +</table> +Chapters: +<table cellpadding="10" border="4"> +<tr> +<td><a href="John1.htm">*1*</a></td> +<td><a href="John2.htm">*2*</a></td> +<td><a href="John3.htm">*3*</a></td> +<td><a href="John4.htm">*4*</a></td> +<td><a href="John5.htm">*5*</a></td> +<td><a href="John6.htm">*6*</a></td> +<td><a href="John7.htm">*7*</a></td> +</tr> </table> -<p><b>Part II: Chapters 8-21</b> -<br>translated by<BR>Fabian R. Larcher, O.P. -<br>Magi Books, Inc., Albany, N.Y., 1998 -<br>(notes to these chapters provisional) -<table cellpadding=10 border=4><tr><td><A HREF="John8.htm">*8*</A><td><A HREF="John9.htm">*9*</A><td><A HREF="John10.htm">*10*</A><td><A HREF="John11.htm">*11*</A><td><A HREF="John12.htm">*12*</A><td><A HREF="John13.htm">*13*</A><td><A HREF="John14.htm">*14*</A> -<tr><td><A HREF="John15.htm">*15*</A><td><A HREF="John16.htm">*16*</A><td><A HREF="John17.htm">*17*</A><td><A HREF="John18.htm">*18*</A><td><A HREF="John19.htm">*19*</A><td><A HREF="John20.htm">*20*</A><td><A HREF="John21.htm">*21*</A> +<p><b>Part II: Chapters 8-21</b><br /> +translated by<br /> +Fabian R. Larcher, O.P.<br /> +Magi Books, Inc., Albany, N.Y., 1998<br /> +(notes to these chapters provisional)</p> +<table cellpadding="10" border="4"> +<tr> +<td><a href="John8.htm">*8*</a></td> +<td><a href="John9.htm">*9*</a></td> +<td><a href="John10.htm">*10*</a></td> +<td><a href="John11.htm">*11*</a></td> +<td><a href="John12.htm">*12*</a></td> +<td><a href="John13.htm">*13*</a></td> +<td><a href="John14.htm">*14*</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> +<td><a href="John15.htm">*15*</a></td> +<td><a href="John16.htm">*16*</a></td> +<td><a href="John17.htm">*17*</a></td> +<td><a href="John18.htm">*18*</a></td> +<td><a href="John19.htm">*19*</a></td> +<td><a href="John20.htm">*20*</a></td> +<td><a href="John21.htm">*21*</a></td> +</tr> </table> -<BR> -<hr width=50%> -<A NAME="01"><p><b>INTRODUCTION</b></CENTER> -<br> -<div style=text-align:justify> -<p>St. Thomas’ commentary on the Gospel of St. John is unique among his many writings on Sacred -Scripture. It is the work of a master theologian, delivered at the University of Paris, then the -intellectual center in Christendom, when Thomas was at the height of his fame and apostolic zeal -for souls. A fourteenth-century list of Thomas’ writings notes that this commentary is a -<i>reportatio</i> by Reginald of Piperno and adds “better than which none can be found.” -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote1', WPFootnote1 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +<br /> +<hr width="50%" /> +<a name="01"></a> +<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b></p> +</center> +<br /> +<div style="text-align:justify"> +<p>St. Thomas’ commentary on the Gospel of St. John is unique +among his many writings on Sacred Scripture. It is the work of a +master theologian, delivered at the University of Paris, then the +intellectual center in Christendom, when Thomas was at the height +of his fame and apostolic zeal for souls. A fourteenth-century list +of Thomas’ writings notes that this commentary is a +<i>reportatio</i> by Reginald of Piperno and adds “better +than which none can be found.” <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote1',%20WPFootnote1%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote1" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote1 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote1\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote1\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - A <i>reportatio</i> -is a verbal report of an actual lecture taken down by a scribe or student in the course of actual -delivery. In this case the scribe was the faithful Friar Reginald of Piperno, who had been the -“constant companion,” or socius, for the last fifteen years of Thomas’ short but busy life. The -Italian Province of Dominicans wisely provided Thomas with this kind of personal secretary and -general factotum after he returned from Paris as a Master in Sacred Theology in 1260. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote2', WPFootnote2 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> +//]]> +</script> A <i>reportatio</i> is a verbal report of an actual +lecture taken down by a scribe or student in the course of actual +delivery. In this case the scribe was the faithful Friar Reginald +of Piperno, who had been the “constant companion,” or +socius, for the last fifteen years of Thomas’ short but busy +life. The Italian Province of Dominicans wisely provided Thomas +with this kind of personal secretary and general factotum after he +returned from Paris as a Master in Sacred Theology in 1260. +<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote2',%20WPFootnote2%20)"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" +alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote2" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote2 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote2\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote2\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> -</p> -<p>A <i>reportatio</i> is not exactly a dictation in our sense of the term; it is more like a student’s -notebook in shorthand containing basically the gist of what is being said, but usually with varying -numbers of verbal omissions and inaccuracies. But this commentary is more than a mere scribal -report. It was in fact “corrected” by Thomas himself—if we are to believe Tolomeo of Lucca, one -of Thomas’ early biographers and confreres—before the commentary went into circulation -through copies made by hand, the customary mode of publication before the era of the printing -press. More than that: according to Bernard Gui, another confrere and early biographer, Thomas -himself wrote out in full the commentary on the first five chapters of John (and hence this section -ought to be considered an authentic <i>expositio</i>, or authoritative version), while the rest of it +//]]> +</script></p> +<p>A <i>reportatio</i> is not exactly a dictation in our sense of +the term; it is more like a student’s notebook in shorthand +containing basically the gist of what is being said, but usually +with varying numbers of verbal omissions and inaccuracies. But this +commentary is more than a mere scribal report. It was in fact +“corrected” by Thomas himself—if we are to +believe Tolomeo of Lucca, one of Thomas’ early biographers +and confreres—before the commentary went into circulation +through copies made by hand, the customary mode of publication +before the era of the printing press. More than that: according to +Bernard Gui, another confrere and early biographer, Thomas himself +wrote out in full the commentary on the first five chapters of John +(and hence this section ought to be considered an authentic +<i>expositio</i>, or authoritative version), while the rest of it survived in the hand of Reginald, corrected by Thomas.</p> -<p>This commentary was very popular in the Middle Ages, and it ranks among the best of Thomas’ -work as a master theologian and saintly man of faith. It was read not only by theologians -searching for the truth, but also by preachers and pious men and women desiring solid food for -meditation and fervent prayer. Scattered throughout the world there still exist thirty-three -complete and thirteen incomplete manuscript copies of this work, attesting to its considerable -popularity before the age of printing. Innumerable copies of this work have no doubt been lost -or destroyed in the tumult of centuries following the Middle Ages.</p> -<p>This detailed commentary is St. Thomas’ personal response to the Word of God Incarnate as -described in the sublime words of John “the Divine.” For St. Thomas, the God of Abraham, -Isaac, and Jacob spoke to his chosen people through the mouth of prophets in the long course of -salvation history, “But when the appointed time came, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born -a subject of the Law, to redeem the subjects of the Law and to enable us to be adopted as sons” -(Gal 4:4-5). This Incarnate Son, Jesus Christ, is the total manifestation of the Father, the Eternal -Word made flesh. There is nothing left unsaid in the Word; the Father’s love is complete in the -love the Son bears for the Father and for us. Christ’s whole life, his passion, death, and -resurrection, are the praise and glory of the Father “through the working of the Holy Spirit.” -“You must believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me” (Jn 14:11). -“Whatever you ask for in my name I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son” (Jn -14:13). Christ’s “food” was to do the will of his Father in all things, thus glorifying the Father -in Jesus.</p> -<p>One of St. Thomas’ basic theological principles is that everything Jesus Christ did and said was -for our instruction and imitation. Thus the sanctity of our lives is the on-going praise and glory -of the Father, through the Son, by the working of the Holy Spirit. The very being of the Father -is the unqualified affirmation of love for the Son and <i>for </i>us, in the Son. “God is love” (1 Jn 4:8). -This love elicits from us an unreserved affirmation of love for God and neighbor, by which God -is glorified and resplendent in us. The whole of our happiness is this eternal “glory” in tasting -and seeing that the Lord is good (see Ps 34:8). This commentary is St. Thomas’ tasting and -seeing the goodness of Jesus, the Word Incarnate, embodied in the tender words of St. John, the -“beloved disciple,” who leaned on the breast of the Savior at the Last Supper.</p> -<p>Thomas brought to his writing of this commentary on John all the resources at his -disposal—which were considerable—especially the riches of the whole Patristic teaching of the -“Saints” (the <i>sancti Doctores</i>), the wealth of a living tradition in the Roman Church contained -in its teaching, laws, liturgy, and the living Spirit, as well as fidelity to the infallible norms of the -Holy See.</p> -<p>In an address to students and professors of the “Angelicum” (now the Pontifical University of -St. Thomas in Rome) given on January 14, 1958, Pope Pius XII extolled the virtues of its patron, -the Angelic Doctor, who serves as a divinely inspired guide in both philosophy and theology. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote3', WPFootnote3 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +<p>This commentary was very popular in the Middle Ages, and it +ranks among the best of Thomas’ work as a master theologian +and saintly man of faith. It was read not only by theologians +searching for the truth, but also by preachers and pious men and +women desiring solid food for meditation and fervent prayer. +Scattered throughout the world there still exist thirty-three +complete and thirteen incomplete manuscript copies of this work, +attesting to its considerable popularity before the age of +printing. Innumerable copies of this work have no doubt been lost +or destroyed in the tumult of centuries following the Middle +Ages.</p> +<p>This detailed commentary is St. Thomas’ personal response +to the Word of God Incarnate as described in the sublime words of +John “the Divine.” For St. Thomas, the God of Abraham, +Isaac, and Jacob spoke to his chosen people through the mouth of +prophets in the long course of salvation history, “But when +the appointed time came, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born a +subject of the Law, to redeem the subjects of the Law and to enable +us to be adopted as sons” (Gal 4:4-5). This Incarnate Son, +Jesus Christ, is the total manifestation of the Father, the Eternal +Word made flesh. There is nothing left unsaid in the Word; the +Father’s love is complete in the love the Son bears for the +Father and for us. Christ’s whole life, his passion, death, +and resurrection, are the praise and glory of the Father +“through the working of the Holy Spirit.” “You +must believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father +is in me” (Jn 14:11). “Whatever you ask for in my name +I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son” +(Jn 14:13). Christ’s “food” was to do the will of +his Father in all things, thus glorifying the Father in Jesus.</p> +<p>One of St. Thomas’ basic theological principles is that +everything Jesus Christ did and said was for our instruction and +imitation. Thus the sanctity of our lives is the on-going praise +and glory of the Father, through the Son, by the working of the +Holy Spirit. The very being of the Father is the unqualified +affirmation of love for the Son and <i>for</i> us, in the Son. +“God is love” (1 Jn 4:8). This love elicits from us an +unreserved affirmation of love for God and neighbor, by which God +is glorified and resplendent in us. The whole of our happiness is +this eternal “glory” in tasting and seeing that the +Lord is good (see Ps 34:8). This commentary is St. Thomas’ +tasting and seeing the goodness of Jesus, the Word Incarnate, +embodied in the tender words of St. John, the “beloved +disciple,” who leaned on the breast of the Savior at the Last +Supper.</p> +<p>Thomas brought to his writing of this commentary on John all the +resources at his disposal—which were +considerable—especially the riches of the whole Patristic +teaching of the “Saints” (the <i>sancti Doctores</i>), +the wealth of a living tradition in the Roman Church contained in +its teaching, laws, liturgy, and the living Spirit, as well as +fidelity to the infallible norms of the Holy See.</p> +<p>In an address to students and professors of the +“Angelicum” (now the Pontifical University of St. +Thomas in Rome) given on January 14, 1958, Pope Pius XII extolled +the virtues of its patron, the Angelic Doctor, who serves as a +divinely inspired guide in both philosophy and theology. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote3',%20WPFootnote3%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote3" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote3 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote3\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote3\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - -Pope Pius spoke especially of St. Thomas’ own studies as a norm for every student of the -religious disciplines. Just as St. Thomas diligently explored and studied the Bible as the font and -life-spring of all theological studies, so too should the modern student find in biblical studies the -source of his theological development. As St. Thomas himself assures us, “[sacred doctrine] uses -the authority of the canonical Scriptures properly and of necessity in its investigations ... for our -faith is founded on the Revelation made to the Apostles and Prophets, who wrote the canonical -books, but not on revelation (if such there be) made to other teachers.” -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote4', WPFootnote4 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> Pope Pius spoke especially of St. Thomas’ own +studies as a norm for every student of the religious disciplines. +Just as St. Thomas diligently explored and studied the Bible as the +font and life-spring of all theological studies, so too should the +modern student find in biblical studies the source of his +theological development. As St. Thomas himself assures us, +“[sacred doctrine] uses the authority of the canonical +Scriptures properly and of necessity in its investigations ... for +our faith is founded on the Revelation made to the Apostles and +Prophets, who wrote the canonical books, but not on revelation (if +such there be) made to other teachers.” <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote4',%20WPFootnote4%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote4" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote4 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote4\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote4\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - In this conviction -Thomas developed all his own theology. That is to say, the “complement” to Thomas’ -speculations and synthesis are to be found in his commentaries on the books of the Old and New -Testaments, especially those on the Epistles of St. Paul.</p> -<p>In the opinion of those most expert to judge, Thomas’ commentaries on Scripture “shine with -such solidity, subtlety, and precision that they can be numbered among his greatest theological -works,” and are to be esteemed as such. “Wherefore, if anyone should neglect them, he is -scarcely to be said to clearly and fully enjoy a familiarity and knowledge of the holy Angelic -Doctor.” The significant fact is not that Pius XII emphasized the importance of studying Thomas’ -biblical commentaries to Dominicans, who had made their special prerogative the teaching of -“speculative Thomistic theology” and the pursuit of contemplative prayer. The significant fact -is that Pius XII expressed these sentiments shortly before his death and fifteen years after one of -his most important encyclicals, <i>Divino afflante spiritu </i>(30 Sept. 1943), the basic charter of all -Catholic biblical studies in our day, leading to the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, -<i>Dei verbum, </i>of the Second Vatican Council (18 Nov. 1965). In other words, the enormous -advances of modern biblical studies do not automatically nullify the importance of St. Thomas’ +//]]> +</script> In this conviction Thomas developed all his own theology. +That is to say, the “complement” to Thomas’ +speculations and synthesis are to be found in his commentaries on +the books of the Old and New Testaments, especially those on the +Epistles of St. Paul.</p> +<p>In the opinion of those most expert to judge, Thomas’ +commentaries on Scripture “shine with such solidity, +subtlety, and precision that they can be numbered among his +greatest theological works,” and are to be esteemed as such. +“Wherefore, if anyone should neglect them, he is scarcely to +be said to clearly and fully enjoy a familiarity and knowledge of +the holy Angelic Doctor.” The significant fact is not that +Pius XII emphasized the importance of studying Thomas’ +biblical commentaries to Dominicans, who had made their special +prerogative the teaching of “speculative Thomistic +theology” and the pursuit of contemplative prayer. The +significant fact is that Pius XII expressed these sentiments +shortly before his death and fifteen years after one of his most +important encyclicals, <i>Divino afflante spiritu</i> (30 Sept. +1943), the basic charter of all Catholic biblical studies in our +day, leading to the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, +<i>Dei verbum,</i> of the Second Vatican Council (18 Nov. 1965). In +other words, the enormous advances of modern biblical studies do +not automatically nullify the importance of St. Thomas’ commentaries on the Sacred Text.</p> -<p>St. Thomas’ commentaries on the Sacred Text are typically <i>medieval, </i>that is, they lack the -unction, colloquialism, and engaging informality of Patristic commentaries (which were largely -homilies), and the technical and sometimes journalistic resources of modern commentaries, -explanations, and paraphrases. In other words, it is easier to read St. Augustine’s commentary -on John than it is to read St. Thomas’ or that of any other medieval writer addressing students -in the “schools” of Paris and elsewhere. The big difference is between Patristic and Monastic -commentaries, which were largely homiletic, pastoral, personal, and mystical, on the one hand, -and Scholastic commentaries aimed at teaching students in the university or <i>studium </i>the literal -meaning of the text. The style of medieval Scholastic commentaries is rather formal, literal, -student-orientated and bookish. This style often makes such commentaries difficult for a modem -reader to follow, and to some extent hinders him from deriving the greatest benefit for his mind -and heart. At first glance such a “commentary”—with its definitions, divisions, arguments -footnotes and concern for the orthodox meaning of the sacred message—may seem like searching -for a needle in a haystack. But in the case of Thomas’ commentaries the reader may be confident -that his efforts at discovering that needle will prove to be both intellectually and spiritually -rewarding; once discovered, it will be valued as “the pearl of great price” (Mt 13:46).</p> -<p>In this introduction I hope to show the historical context of this particular commentary and to -indicate some aids to a fruitful study of it.</p> -<p>First of all, this work is a biblical commentary by a master in a medieval university. In the Middle -Ages, the Bible and the Bible alone was the official basis for the teaching of theology by fully -qualified masters in the major universities of Europe. In fact, one could say with some -justification that the ultimate goal of all medieval education was an understanding of the Bible -for those who pursued the full course in the Faculty of Theology. Such an understanding was the -nature of sacred theology <i>(fides quaerens intellectum, </i>“faith seeking understanding”). It was the -source of all preaching of the Word of God, and it was the inexhaustible font of living water for -the spiritual life. In order to reach such a lofty goal, much preparation was required. First, tools -had to be acquired as a means of such study. This was the role of a good liberal arts education -and the acquisition of philosophy, “the handmaid of theology.” The study of the liberal arts and -the acquisition of philosophy were functions of the Arts Faculty in the university or <i>studium. -</i>Approximately eight years were devoted by medieval students to acquiring these tools—roughly -equivalent to our four years of high school and four years of college. After the full course had -been completed in “the humanities,” the young man, generally in his mid-twenties, would begin -his study of the Sacred Text, having already heard many sermons in Church and having received -much instruction at home. His study of the Sacred Text began with <i>listening </i>and <i>reading.</i></p> -<p>In the Middle Ages, a personal copy of the Bible was relatively rare, certainly outside university -circles. Every copy of the Bible was written out by hand on parchment, a writing surface made -from carefully treated skins of sheep. Such a copy was extremely expensive and hard to come by. -Although every student of theology tried desperately to obtain a personal copy, most people had -to rely on hearing the Word read to them and recollecting from memory the actual words of the -Bible. For that reason the beginner in theology would <i>listen </i>to older students and the master -(professor). One of the older students, the bachelor of theology, read aloud and paraphrased a -particular book of the Bible. This bachelor was called a “Cursor Biblicus,” a “runner through” -the actual words of the Bible, who did this to acquaint himself and his hearers with the inspired +<p>St. Thomas’ commentaries on the Sacred Text are typically +<i>medieval,</i> that is, they lack the unction, colloquialism, and +engaging informality of Patristic commentaries (which were largely +homilies), and the technical and sometimes journalistic resources +of modern commentaries, explanations, and paraphrases. In other +words, it is easier to read St. Augustine’s commentary on +John than it is to read St. Thomas’ or that of any other +medieval writer addressing students in the “schools” of +Paris and elsewhere. The big difference is between Patristic and +Monastic commentaries, which were largely homiletic, pastoral, +personal, and mystical, on the one hand, and Scholastic +commentaries aimed at teaching students in the university or +<i>studium</i> the literal meaning of the text. The style of +medieval Scholastic commentaries is rather formal, literal, +student-orientated and bookish. This style often makes such +commentaries difficult for a modem reader to follow, and to some +extent hinders him from deriving the greatest benefit for his mind +and heart. At first glance such a +“commentary”—with its definitions, divisions, +arguments footnotes and concern for the orthodox meaning of the +sacred message—may seem like searching for a needle in a +haystack. But in the case of Thomas’ commentaries the reader +may be confident that his efforts at discovering that needle will +prove to be both intellectually and spiritually rewarding; once +discovered, it will be valued as “the pearl of great +price” (Mt 13:46).</p> +<p>In this introduction I hope to show the historical context of +this particular commentary and to indicate some aids to a fruitful +study of it.</p> +<p>First of all, this work is a biblical commentary by a master in +a medieval university. In the Middle Ages, the Bible and the Bible +alone was the official basis for the teaching of theology by fully +qualified masters in the major universities of Europe. In fact, one +could say with some justification that the ultimate goal of all +medieval education was an understanding of the Bible for those who +pursued the full course in the Faculty of Theology. Such an +understanding was the nature of sacred theology <i>(fides quaerens +intellectum,</i> “faith seeking understanding”). It was +the source of all preaching of the Word of God, and it was the +inexhaustible font of living water for the spiritual life. In order +to reach such a lofty goal, much preparation was required. First, +tools had to be acquired as a means of such study. This was the +role of a good liberal arts education and the acquisition of +philosophy, “the handmaid of theology.” The study of +the liberal arts and the acquisition of philosophy were functions +of the Arts Faculty in the university or <i>studium.</i> +Approximately eight years were devoted by medieval students to +acquiring these tools—roughly equivalent to our four years of +high school and four years of college. After the full course had +been completed in “the humanities,” the young man, +generally in his mid-twenties, would begin his study of the Sacred +Text, having already heard many sermons in Church and having +received much instruction at home. His study of the Sacred Text +began with <i>listening</i> and <i>reading.</i></p> +<p>In the Middle Ages, a personal copy of the Bible was relatively +rare, certainly outside university circles. Every copy of the Bible +was written out by hand on parchment, a writing surface made from +carefully treated skins of sheep. Such a copy was extremely +expensive and hard to come by. Although every student of theology +tried desperately to obtain a personal copy, most people had to +rely on hearing the Word read to them and recollecting from memory +the actual words of the Bible. For that reason the beginner in +theology would <i>listen</i> to older students and the master +(professor). One of the older students, the bachelor of theology, +read aloud and paraphrased a particular book of the Bible. This +bachelor was called a “Cursor Biblicus,” a +“runner through” the actual words of the Bible, who did +this to acquaint himself and his hearers with the inspired words.</p> -<p>A splendid example of the work of such a “runner” is St. Thomas’ commentary on Isaiah; it is -the work of a <i>cursor </i>and not that of a master. Only a master could expound the text with -authority and confidence; the bachelor merely skimmed through it as a runner would skim over -the course in a race. A higher ranking bachelor devoted his energies mainly to explaining the -official theological handbook, the <i>Sentences </i>of Peter Lombard (d. 1160). These <i>Sentences </i>were -a systematic collection of Patristic teachings, arranged in four books following the order of the -Apostles’ Creed. This bachelor was called the <i>bachalarius Sententiarum, </i>a “Bachelor of the -<i>Sentences. </i>“After listening to others for about four years, the young student of theology would -himself become a bachelor and perform certain duties under a particular master, his main -professor of theology.</p> -<p>Every university in the Middle Ages had a limited number of chairs, or professorships, for the -masters to occupy. At the time of St. Thomas, there were twelve chairs of theology at the -University of Paris, the Dominicans having two of them. Before occupying one of these chairs, -the student had to have devoted many long years to study and actual discussions, or -“disputations,” in the university, He had to be at least thirty-five years old before meriting the -title of “Master of the Sacred Page” and the right to expound the Bible in an authoritative manner -as a true theologian, professionally qualified.</p> -<p>St. Thomas was twice professor of theology at Paris—a fact most unusual in itself. There were -very few such cases where a fully fledged master would return to his old chair, thus preventing -a new master from occupying it. But the intellectual, social, and religious climate in Paris at that -time demanded the return of Thomas to the center of all theological learning in Europe. The new -mendicant Orders (mainly Dominicans and Franciscans) were again being attacked by secular -(i.e., diocesan) masters of theology, and their right to teach, preach, and beg was challenged by -some of the most powerful voices in Europe. The center of this controversy Was the University -of Paris, where the very existence of Dominicans and Franciscans was under fire. At the climax -of this renewed attack, the second in the history of the Dominican Order, St. Thomas was -recalled to Paris by the Master General of the Dominican Order, Blessed John of Vercelli. -Thomas arrived in Paris with his companion Reginald in the cold winter of 1269 after the -academic term had begun. Immediately Thomas took upon himself the duties of a master in -theology, namely, lecturing on a carefully chosen book of the Bible, presiding at academic -“disputations” and resolving the question under discussion, and preaching to the university -crowd. At the same time, he was composing the Second Part of his <i>Summa theologiae, </i>which he -had begun in Rome two years earlier, and dictating a number of literal commentaries on various -works of Aristotle for young masters in arts, that is, teachers in the Faculty of Arts, whose duty -it was to expound the text of Aristotle. During the two and a half years Thomas spent at Paris the -second time, he successfully defended the rights of mendicants to teach, preach, and flourish. -During this same Parisian regency he lectured on the Gospel of St. John.</p> -<p>These lectures on John would have been lost to posterity had not the faithful Reginald taken -notes, which were later “corrected” by Thomas himself. The reason Thomas “corrected” -Reginald’s transcription was that a wealthy secular (i.e., diocesan) student wanted a copy for -himself. This student was Adenulf of Anagni, an Italian cleric, provost of Saint-Omer (since -1264), later master in theology (1282-85), and canon of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. Adenulf, -a student of Thomas during the years 1269-72, offered a considerable amount of money to have -a professional scribe make a copy of this remarkable commentary for himself. Without Adenulf’s -enthusiasm and money, the “lectures” (<i>lecturae</i>)<i> </i>on John would have remained a simple report, -or <i>reportatio. </i>If it had not been for Reginald, apparently, these lectures would have gone -completely from history. But the fact is that we do have at hand the acute mind of Thomas -Aquinas, a master theologian and saint, on the Gospel of St. John. This commentary reflects the -mind of Thomas at its peak, but before he composed the Third Part of the <i>Summa </i>dealing with -Christ, the Sacraments, and the Church. It is a scholastic analysis of St. John’s remarkable -testimony of the Good News of Salvation, namely, that the Word became flesh, died for our -salvation, and is now risen from the dead to come again as our merciful judge.</p> -<p>Earlier, at the request of his intimate friend Pope Urban IV, Thomas had compiled a continuous -gloss on all four Gospels, which he had collated from the Latin and Greek Fathers of the Church. -Frequently he even instigated new translations of Greek sources, as he himself confessed in the -prologue. This continuous gloss, popularly called the <i>Catena Aurea, </i>or “Golden Chain,” was not -finished when Urban died in 1264. But Thomas continued his labors on the gloss, which he -completed in 1267 and dedicated to Cardinal Annibaldo d’Annibaldi, Thomas’ close friend and -former pupil at Paris. The intense labor on the Gospel of John for the <i>Catena </i>molded the mind -of Thomas in his personal understanding of the Sacred Text of John. St. John’s Gospel is very -difficult to understand. Unlike the Synoptic writers, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, St. John’s Gospel -is a carefully devised presentation of his personal understanding of the sacred doctrine taught by -Jesus, on whose breast he reclined at the Last Supper. John was always known as “the disciple -whom Jesus loved.” For St. Thomas, John, the Son of Zebedee, the author of this Gospel, was -a virgin, whose appropriate symbol is the eagle soaring in the heights of contemplation. Thomas’ -detailed study of the Latin and Greek Fathers, needed to complete his Gloss on John, prepared -him to shed his own light on the text when the opportune moment arrived. That moment arrived -when Thomas returned to Paris for the second time (1269-72) at the age of about forty-four, full -of strength and vigor.</p> -<p>But his is a typical medieval commentary because, unlike Patristic, monastic, and modern -commentaries on John, it utilizes certain techniques familiar to all in the Middle Ages, but -strange to us today. First of all, it is a theological commentary concerned with penetrating the -literal sense of the words recorded, and seeing through the literal sense to the spiritual. The -medieval university theologian was primarily concerned with the literal sense of scripture, that -is, with the sacred message intended by the human and divine author. It is therefore primarily -concerned with “the theological teaching” of the Bible. St. Thomas did not have at his disposal -the infinitely varied techniques of modern biblical scholarship. He knew almost nothing about -biblical and near-eastern languages, archeology, philology, comparative religion, and the -historical method. If he had, he would most certainly have used them. In the Encyclical <i>Divino -afflante Spiritu </i>(30 Sept. 1943), Pope Pius XII urged the importance of textual criticism, biblical -and oriental languages, archeology, profane and sacred history, as well as form criticism and the -demands of a sound historical method. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote5', WPFootnote5 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +<p>A splendid example of the work of such a “runner” is +St. Thomas’ commentary on Isaiah; it is the work of a +<i>cursor</i> and not that of a master. Only a master could expound +the text with authority and confidence; the bachelor merely skimmed +through it as a runner would skim over the course in a race. A +higher ranking bachelor devoted his energies mainly to explaining +the official theological handbook, the <i>Sentences</i> of Peter +Lombard (d. 1160). These <i>Sentences</i> were a systematic +collection of Patristic teachings, arranged in four books following +the order of the Apostles’ Creed. This bachelor was called +the <i>bachalarius Sententiarum,</i> a “Bachelor of the +<i>Sentences.</i> “After listening to others for about four +years, the young student of theology would himself become a +bachelor and perform certain duties under a particular master, his +main professor of theology.</p> +<p>Every university in the Middle Ages had a limited number of +chairs, or professorships, for the masters to occupy. At the time +of St. Thomas, there were twelve chairs of theology at the +University of Paris, the Dominicans having two of them. Before +occupying one of these chairs, the student had to have devoted many +long years to study and actual discussions, or +“disputations,” in the university, He had to be at +least thirty-five years old before meriting the title of +“Master of the Sacred Page” and the right to expound +the Bible in an authoritative manner as a true theologian, +professionally qualified.</p> +<p>St. Thomas was twice professor of theology at Paris—a fact +most unusual in itself. There were very few such cases where a +fully fledged master would return to his old chair, thus preventing +a new master from occupying it. But the intellectual, social, and +religious climate in Paris at that time demanded the return of +Thomas to the center of all theological learning in Europe. The new +mendicant Orders (mainly Dominicans and Franciscans) were again +being attacked by secular (i.e., diocesan) masters of theology, and +their right to teach, preach, and beg was challenged by some of the +most powerful voices in Europe. The center of this controversy Was +the University of Paris, where the very existence of Dominicans and +Franciscans was under fire. At the climax of this renewed attack, +the second in the history of the Dominican Order, St. Thomas was +recalled to Paris by the Master General of the Dominican Order, +Blessed John of Vercelli. Thomas arrived in Paris with his +companion Reginald in the cold winter of 1269 after the academic +term had begun. Immediately Thomas took upon himself the duties of +a master in theology, namely, lecturing on a carefully chosen book +of the Bible, presiding at academic “disputations” and +resolving the question under discussion, and preaching to the +university crowd. At the same time, he was composing the Second +Part of his <i>Summa theologiae,</i> which he had begun in Rome two +years earlier, and dictating a number of literal commentaries on +various works of Aristotle for young masters in arts, that is, +teachers in the Faculty of Arts, whose duty it was to expound the +text of Aristotle. During the two and a half years Thomas spent at +Paris the second time, he successfully defended the rights of +mendicants to teach, preach, and flourish. During this same +Parisian regency he lectured on the Gospel of St. John.</p> +<p>These lectures on John would have been lost to posterity had not +the faithful Reginald taken notes, which were later +“corrected” by Thomas himself. The reason Thomas +“corrected” Reginald’s transcription was that a +wealthy secular (i.e., diocesan) student wanted a copy for himself. +This student was Adenulf of Anagni, an Italian cleric, provost of +Saint-Omer (since 1264), later master in theology (1282-85), and +canon of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. Adenulf, a student of +Thomas during the years 1269-72, offered a considerable amount of +money to have a professional scribe make a copy of this remarkable +commentary for himself. Without Adenulf’s enthusiasm and +money, the “lectures” (<i>lecturae</i>) on John would +have remained a simple report, or <i>reportatio.</i> If it had not +been for Reginald, apparently, these lectures would have gone +completely from history. But the fact is that we do have at hand +the acute mind of Thomas Aquinas, a master theologian and saint, on +the Gospel of St. John. This commentary reflects the mind of Thomas +at its peak, but before he composed the Third Part of the +<i>Summa</i> dealing with Christ, the Sacraments, and the Church. +It is a scholastic analysis of St. John’s remarkable +testimony of the Good News of Salvation, namely, that the Word +became flesh, died for our salvation, and is now risen from the +dead to come again as our merciful judge.</p> +<p>Earlier, at the request of his intimate friend Pope Urban IV, +Thomas had compiled a continuous gloss on all four Gospels, which +he had collated from the Latin and Greek Fathers of the Church. +Frequently he even instigated new translations of Greek sources, as +he himself confessed in the prologue. This continuous gloss, +popularly called the <i>Catena Aurea,</i> or “Golden +Chain,” was not finished when Urban died in 1264. But Thomas +continued his labors on the gloss, which he completed in 1267 and +dedicated to Cardinal Annibaldo d’Annibaldi, Thomas’ +close friend and former pupil at Paris. The intense labor on the +Gospel of John for the <i>Catena</i> molded the mind of Thomas in +his personal understanding of the Sacred Text of John. St. +John’s Gospel is very difficult to understand. Unlike the +Synoptic writers, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, St. John’s Gospel +is a carefully devised presentation of his personal understanding +of the sacred doctrine taught by Jesus, on whose breast he reclined +at the Last Supper. John was always known as “the disciple +whom Jesus loved.” For St. Thomas, John, the Son of Zebedee, +the author of this Gospel, was a virgin, whose appropriate symbol +is the eagle soaring in the heights of contemplation. Thomas’ +detailed study of the Latin and Greek Fathers, needed to complete +his Gloss on John, prepared him to shed his own light on the text +when the opportune moment arrived. That moment arrived when Thomas +returned to Paris for the second time (1269-72) at the age of about +forty-four, full of strength and vigor.</p> +<p>But his is a typical medieval commentary because, unlike +Patristic, monastic, and modern commentaries on John, it utilizes +certain techniques familiar to all in the Middle Ages, but strange +to us today. First of all, it is a theological commentary concerned +with penetrating the literal sense of the words recorded, and +seeing through the literal sense to the spiritual. The medieval +university theologian was primarily concerned with the literal +sense of scripture, that is, with the sacred message intended by +the human and divine author. It is therefore primarily concerned +with “the theological teaching” of the Bible. St. +Thomas did not have at his disposal the infinitely varied +techniques of modern biblical scholarship. He knew almost nothing +about biblical and near-eastern languages, archeology, philology, +comparative religion, and the historical method. If he had, he +would most certainly have used them. In the Encyclical <i>Divino +afflante Spiritu</i> (30 Sept. 1943), Pope Pius XII urged the +importance of textual criticism, biblical and oriental languages, +archeology, profane and sacred history, as well as form criticism +and the demands of a sound historical method. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote5',%20WPFootnote5%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote5" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote5 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote5\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote5\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - He noted with the Angelic Doctor that “in Scripture -divine things are presented to us in the manner which is in common use amongst men.” -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote6', WPFootnote6 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> He noted with the Angelic Doctor that “in Scripture +divine things are presented to us in the manner which is in common +use amongst men.” <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote6',%20WPFootnote6%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote6" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote6 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote6\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote6\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - The -Bible is the Word of God in the words of men, and this manner of speaking in various ages to -various people must be carefully studied with all the auxiliary sciences. But even after all this has -been tended to, there is still “the theological doctrine” contained in the Sacred Books. The -modem exegete should use every means available to discover and explain “the literal sense and -especially the theological. “ -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote7', WPFootnote7 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> The Bible is the Word of God in the words of men, and +this manner of speaking in various ages to various people must be +carefully studied with all the auxiliary sciences. But even after +all this has been tended to, there is still “the theological +doctrine” contained in the Sacred Books. The modem exegete +should use every means available to discover and explain “the +literal sense and especially the theological. “ <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote7',%20WPFootnote7%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote7" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote7 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote7\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote7\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - It is this “theological sense” <i>(sensus theologicus), </i>expounded by St. -Thomas in his commentary, that is most fruitful for our meditation, prayer, and preaching the -Word of God today.</p> -<p>The literal sense, as St. Thomas teaches, is the objective, formal, and direct meaning intended -by the words in the sacred and inspired text. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote8', WPFootnote8 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> It is this “theological sense” <i>(sensus +theologicus),</i> expounded by St. Thomas in his commentary, that +is most fruitful for our meditation, prayer, and preaching the Word +of God today.</p> +<p>The literal sense, as St. Thomas teaches, is the objective, +formal, and direct meaning intended by the words in the sacred and +inspired text. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote8',%20WPFootnote8%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote8" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote8 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote8\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote8\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - The author of these words is both God and man, -since the Bible is “the inspired Word of God.” Modem biblical techniques, of course, were -unknown to Thomas. All he had was his personal copy of the Latin Vulgate (which was not a -critical edition), the familiar teaching of all the Latin and Greek Fathers known to him, his own -prayerful reflection on the text, and his native genius attentive to the Spirit of God and to the text. -Among the human means Thomas had at his disposal were grammar, logic, and Aristotelian -philosophy. The literal (or historical) sense was in principle the only basis of theological thought -and discussion. The spiritual sense only enlarged, or extended, the basic literal sense. By -“spiritual sense” we do not mean the pious, personal, private, and subjective sense a reader might -derive from a prayerful reading of the text. Rather, the “spiritual sense” is the enlarged reality -“intended” by person, place, or thing signified in the literal, as when the brazen serpent raised -by Moses in the desert is taken to signify Christ’s crucifixion as the divine means of healing -mankind, or when the paschal lamb is taken to signify Christ who was sacrificed for our sins. The -“spiritual sense” is the enlarged sense “intended” by a given symbol in the plan of divine -providence.</p> -<p>Since only God as the author of all things can make one symbol significative of another reality, -the Bible is the only book that can contain a “spiritual sense” as it was understood by medieval -theologians. Consequently only the sacred author himself can inform us of the existence of such -a sense. We could never know that one reality is to be taken as a symbol of another reality unless -the Sacred Author so informs us in the literal sense. For example, the author of the Book of -Numbers (21:19) explains how Moses was directed to make a brazen “serpent” and set it up as -a sign; whoever was bitten by one of the fiery serpents and “looked at the sign” that Moses had -set up was saved from death. But it is John (3:14 15) who explains that “as Moses lifted up the -serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up that whoever believes in him may not -perish, but may have life everlasting.” The significance of Old Testament texts is declared by the -sacred writer when he explains Christ’s actions as being “in fulfillment of the Scriptures.” -Similarly St. Paul frequently reveals the “spiritual sense” of the Law and Prophets by declaring +//]]> +</script> The author of these words is both God and man, since the +Bible is “the inspired Word of God.” Modem biblical +techniques, of course, were unknown to Thomas. All he had was his +personal copy of the Latin Vulgate (which was not a critical +edition), the familiar teaching of all the Latin and Greek Fathers +known to him, his own prayerful reflection on the text, and his +native genius attentive to the Spirit of God and to the text. Among +the human means Thomas had at his disposal were grammar, logic, and +Aristotelian philosophy. The literal (or historical) sense was in +principle the only basis of theological thought and discussion. The +spiritual sense only enlarged, or extended, the basic literal +sense. By “spiritual sense” we do not mean the pious, +personal, private, and subjective sense a reader might derive from +a prayerful reading of the text. Rather, the “spiritual +sense” is the enlarged reality “intended” by +person, place, or thing signified in the literal, as when the +brazen serpent raised by Moses in the desert is taken to signify +Christ’s crucifixion as the divine means of healing mankind, +or when the paschal lamb is taken to signify Christ who was +sacrificed for our sins. The “spiritual sense” is the +enlarged sense “intended” by a given symbol in the plan +of divine providence.</p> +<p>Since only God as the author of all things can make one symbol +significative of another reality, the Bible is the only book that +can contain a “spiritual sense” as it was understood by +medieval theologians. Consequently only the sacred author himself +can inform us of the existence of such a sense. We could never know +that one reality is to be taken as a symbol of another reality +unless the Sacred Author so informs us in the literal sense. For +example, the author of the Book of Numbers (21:19) explains how +Moses was directed to make a brazen “serpent” and set +it up as a sign; whoever was bitten by one of the fiery serpents +and “looked at the sign” that Moses had set up was +saved from death. But it is John (3:14 15) who explains that +“as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the +Son of man be lifted up that whoever believes in him may not +perish, but may have life everlasting.” The significance of +Old Testament texts is declared by the sacred writer when he +explains Christ’s actions as being “in fulfillment of +the Scriptures.” Similarly St. Paul frequently reveals the +“spiritual sense” of the Law and Prophets by declaring the Christian fulfillment in Jesus.</p> -<p>There were three kinds of spiritual sense recognized by medieval theologians: the allegorical, the -moral, and the anagogical. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote9', WPFootnote9 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +<p>There were three kinds of spiritual sense recognized by medieval +theologians: the allegorical, the moral, and the anagogical. +<a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote9',%20WPFootnote9%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote9" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote9 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote9\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote9\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - When anything in the Old Testament was taken to signify something -in the New Testament, this sense was called allegorical. Under this sense would be included all -those figures, persons, and events as symbolic of Jesus and his life and death on earth. When -anything in the life of Jesus is taken as a model for our life, we call this the moral sense. Under -this sense would be included all those virtues presented to us for our imitation of Christ. When -anything in the Scriptures is taken to signify something in the eternal kingdom hereafter, for -example, “the new Jerusalem,” we call this the anagogical sense. Thus the “spiritual sense” of -a passage was taken to be an objective meaning intended by the sacred author, the Holy Spirit. -This, of course, presupposes that the authors of the New Testament were inspired by the Holy -Spirit.</p> -<p>Whatever personal message one may derive from reading the Bible prayerfully and thoughtfully -is purely personal and beyond the science of theology as the study of God’s message to mankind. -The personal message is most significant for the reader, but this personal significance must be -carefully controlled by objective theological norms such as the Christian faith, sacred doctrine, -the constant teaching of the Church, and a prayerful listening to the Holy Spirit.</p> -<p>The most difficult technique of medieval commentators for us to comprehend is the use of logic -and the “scholastic method.” Aristotelian logic is the most significant technique contained in the -scholastic method. The purpose of the scholastic method was to instill “scientific” knowledge -through (1) definition, (2) division, and (3) demonstration, or demonstrative proof. These -techniques (or <i>modi sciendi) </i>were taken for granted by every medieval theologian as the best -means of learning the truth about anything. It was a method of teaching, the via <i>docendi, </i>which -was an imitation of the “way of discovery” <i>(via inveniendi </i>or <i>inventionis). </i>The goal of all -education is truth. The goal of theological education is an understanding of the doctrines of -revelation, the <i>sacra doctrina</i>. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote10', WPFootnote10 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> When anything in the Old Testament was taken to signify +something in the New Testament, this sense was called allegorical. +Under this sense would be included all those figures, persons, and +events as symbolic of Jesus and his life and death on earth. When +anything in the life of Jesus is taken as a model for our life, we +call this the moral sense. Under this sense would be included all +those virtues presented to us for our imitation of Christ. When +anything in the Scriptures is taken to signify something in the +eternal kingdom hereafter, for example, “the new +Jerusalem,” we call this the anagogical sense. Thus the +“spiritual sense” of a passage was taken to be an +objective meaning intended by the sacred author, the Holy Spirit. +This, of course, presupposes that the authors of the New Testament +were inspired by the Holy Spirit.</p> +<p>Whatever personal message one may derive from reading the Bible +prayerfully and thoughtfully is purely personal and beyond the +science of theology as the study of God’s message to mankind. +The personal message is most significant for the reader, but this +personal significance must be carefully controlled by objective +theological norms such as the Christian faith, sacred doctrine, the +constant teaching of the Church, and a prayerful listening to the +Holy Spirit.</p> +<p>The most difficult technique of medieval commentators for us to +comprehend is the use of logic and the “scholastic +method.” Aristotelian logic is the most significant technique +contained in the scholastic method. The purpose of the scholastic +method was to instill “scientific” knowledge through +(1) definition, (2) division, and (3) demonstration, or +demonstrative proof. These techniques (or <i>modi sciendi)</i> were +taken for granted by every medieval theologian as the best means of +learning the truth about anything. It was a method of teaching, the +via <i>docendi,</i> which was an imitation of the “way of +discovery” <i>(via inveniendi</i> or <i>inventionis).</i> The +goal of all education is truth. The goal of theological education +is an understanding of the doctrines of revelation, the <i>sacra +doctrina</i>. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote10',%20WPFootnote10%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote10" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote10 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote10\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote10\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - It is faith seeking understanding (<i>fides quaerens intellectum</i>),<i> </i>as -St. Anselm puts it, The scholastic method, in a sense, is artificial and humanly contrived by -ineans of logic. In the Middle Ages the scholastic method was thought to be the best way of -learning everything from A to Z. An example of this method of learning is embedded in Thomas’ -commentary on John’s Gospel. It cannot be eliminated. Therefore it depends on us moderns to -bend a little by trying to see through it, and not be put off by it. Always one will find definitions, -divisions, and proofs in all medieval commentaries, whether they be on Aristotle, Boethius, or +//]]> +</script> It is faith seeking understanding (<i>fides quaerens +intellectum</i>), as St. Anselm puts it, The scholastic method, in +a sense, is artificial and humanly contrived by ineans of logic. In +the Middle Ages the scholastic method was thought to be the best +way of learning everything from A to Z. An example of this method +of learning is embedded in Thomas’ commentary on John’s +Gospel. It cannot be eliminated. Therefore it depends on us moderns +to bend a little by trying to see through it, and not be put off by +it. Always one will find definitions, divisions, and proofs in all +medieval commentaries, whether they be on Aristotle, Boethius, or the Bible.</p> -<p>The Scholastics had a penchant for <i>order; </i>where none existed, one was imposed. Heeding the -words of Aristotle that “it belongs to the wise man to order,” they thought the prerogative of a -good teacher was to order all things well, setting out the message, or truth to be conveyed, in an -orderly and fitting way. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote11', WPFootnote11 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +<p>The Scholastics had a penchant for <i>order;</i> where none +existed, one was imposed. Heeding the words of Aristotle that +“it belongs to the wise man to order,” they thought the +prerogative of a good teacher was to order all things well, setting +out the message, or truth to be conveyed, in an orderly and fitting +way. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote11',%20WPFootnote11%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote11" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote11 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote11\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote11\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - This is why the first thing one notices when reading a medieval -commentary is the <i>division, </i>or the ordering of the whole into parts. The least one can perceive -is a beginning, a middle, and an end. But more than not, one can usually perceive some orderly -procedure in the middle.</p> -<p>Modern biblical scholars usually see in, St. John’s Gospel a prologue (1:1-14), a middle (cc. 1-20), and an epilogue (c. 21). They then proceed to divide the middle into the Book of Signs (cc. -1-12) and the Book of Glory (cc. 13-20). St. Thomas also divides the Gospel into roughly these -two parts, but he considers chapter 12 as belonging to the Book of Glory, because the chapter -opens “six days before Passover” with the anointing of the feet of Jesus for his burial (12:1 -11), -continues on to the triumphal entry into Jerusalem (12:12-19), builds to the coming of the Greeks -(12:20-22), and the long discourse of Jesus in which he cries out, “Father, glorify your name” -(12:28). In any case, it is particularly in this second part that Thomas had to use his ingenuity to -resolve the discrepancies between John and the Synoptics. The Synoptics compress the public -life of Jesus into one year with the one tragic journey of Jesus up to Jerusalem, where he is -crucified and dies, to be raised up on the third day. John extends the public life of Jesus into three -years with the final year ending in his passion, death, and resurrection. St. Thomas is very much -concerned with the literal, or historical, sense of the narrative, especially as concerns the passion, -death, and resurrection of the Lord. Throughout the whole exposition of the narrative, Thomas -relied heavily on the interpretation of the Fathers of the Church, both Latin and Greek. He quotes -the authority of St. Augustine 373 times, St. John Chrysostom 217 times, and Origen 95 times. -It is an exposition that relies heavily on the tradition of the Church and on his own prayerful -theological reflections.</p> -<p>In the commentary on St. John’s Gospel, Thomas is concerned not only with the literal sense, -which for him is of Prime importance and concern, but also with the spiritual sense, as explained -above. More than the other Evangelists, John reveals the “fulfillment of the Scriptures,” that is, -concern with the prophecies and symbols of the Old Law. Christ’s own prophetic words and -actions are seen by John to be a foreshadowing of the passion, death, and resurrection of the Lord -by which we are all saved. Above all, for St. Thomas, John is the Evangelist of the divinity of -Jesus, “the Word made flesh.” He says, “While the other Evangelists treat principally of the -mysteries of the humanity of Christ, John, especially and above all, makes known the divinity -of Christ in his Gospel” (Prologue). Thomas, following the lead of St. Jerome, thought that John -wrote his Gospel after the other three Gospels had been written, in order to refute new heresies -that had arisen concerning the divinity of Christ. Following Jerome, Thomas singled out the -Ebionites (whose founder Thomas erroneously thought to have been “Ebion”)—and Cerinthus, -a Gnostic heretic who flourished around 100 A.D., as among those who denied the divinity of -Christ. Even St. Irenaeus <i>(Adv. haer.</i>, III,<i> </i>11) asserts that St. John wrote his Gospel to refute -Cerinthus. Thus, St. Thomas observes in his Prologue, while John did not pass over the mysteries -of Christ’s humanity, he especially conveys the divinity of Christ in his Gospel. In this -commentary, therefore, Thomas repeatedly refutes the heresies of Apollinaris, Arius, the Arians, -Ebionites, Eutyches, the Manichees, Nestorius, Pelagius, the Pelagians, and Sabellius - all of -which plagued the Church in the first five centuries of its existence. For Thomas these heresies -were not merely false doctrines irrelevant to the modem Christian, but vital guidelines to the -purity of the Christian faith, the orthodox teaching of the living Church.</p> -<p>Earlier in his career, Thomas had been asked by the archbishop of Palermo to write a short work -that could be memorized, dealing with the articles of faith “from the Creed of the Fathers” (i.e., -the Apostles’ Creed) and also the basic errors concerning them; the archbishop apparently asked -also for the same presentation for all the sacraments of the Church. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote12', WPFootnote12 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> +//]]> +</script> This is why the first thing one notices when reading a +medieval commentary is the <i>division,</i> or the ordering of the +whole into parts. The least one can perceive is a beginning, a +middle, and an end. But more than not, one can usually perceive +some orderly procedure in the middle.</p> +<p>Modern biblical scholars usually see in, St. John’s Gospel +a prologue (1:1-14), a middle (cc. 1-20), and an epilogue (c. 21). +They then proceed to divide the middle into the Book of Signs (cc. +1-12) and the Book of Glory (cc. 13-20). St. Thomas also divides +the Gospel into roughly these two parts, but he considers chapter +12 as belonging to the Book of Glory, because the chapter opens +“six days before Passover” with the anointing of the +feet of Jesus for his burial (12:1 -11), continues on to the +triumphal entry into Jerusalem (12:12-19), builds to the coming of +the Greeks (12:20-22), and the long discourse of Jesus in which he +cries out, “Father, glorify your name” (12:28). In any +case, it is particularly in this second part that Thomas had to use +his ingenuity to resolve the discrepancies between John and the +Synoptics. The Synoptics compress the public life of Jesus into one +year with the one tragic journey of Jesus up to Jerusalem, where he +is crucified and dies, to be raised up on the third day. John +extends the public life of Jesus into three years with the final +year ending in his passion, death, and resurrection. St. Thomas is +very much concerned with the literal, or historical, sense of the +narrative, especially as concerns the passion, death, and +resurrection of the Lord. Throughout the whole exposition of the +narrative, Thomas relied heavily on the interpretation of the +Fathers of the Church, both Latin and Greek. He quotes the +authority of St. Augustine 373 times, St. John Chrysostom 217 +times, and Origen 95 times. It is an exposition that relies heavily +on the tradition of the Church and on his own prayerful theological +reflections.</p> +<p>In the commentary on St. John’s Gospel, Thomas is +concerned not only with the literal sense, which for him is of +Prime importance and concern, but also with the spiritual sense, as +explained above. More than the other Evangelists, John reveals the +“fulfillment of the Scriptures,” that is, concern with +the prophecies and symbols of the Old Law. Christ’s own +prophetic words and actions are seen by John to be a foreshadowing +of the passion, death, and resurrection of the Lord by which we are +all saved. Above all, for St. Thomas, John is the Evangelist of the +divinity of Jesus, “the Word made flesh.” He says, +“While the other Evangelists treat principally of the +mysteries of the humanity of Christ, John, especially and above +all, makes known the divinity of Christ in his Gospel” +(Prologue). Thomas, following the lead of St. Jerome, thought that +John wrote his Gospel after the other three Gospels had been +written, in order to refute new heresies that had arisen concerning +the divinity of Christ. Following Jerome, Thomas singled out the +Ebionites (whose founder Thomas erroneously thought to have been +“Ebion”)—and Cerinthus, a Gnostic heretic who +flourished around 100 A.D., as among those who denied the divinity +of Christ. Even St. Irenaeus <i>(Adv. haer.</i>, III, 11) asserts +that St. John wrote his Gospel to refute Cerinthus. Thus, St. +Thomas observes in his Prologue, while John did not pass over the +mysteries of Christ’s humanity, he especially conveys the +divinity of Christ in his Gospel. In this commentary, therefore, +Thomas repeatedly refutes the heresies of Apollinaris, Arius, the +Arians, Ebionites, Eutyches, the Manichees, Nestorius, Pelagius, +the Pelagians, and Sabellius - all of which plagued the Church in +the first five centuries of its existence. For Thomas these +heresies were not merely false doctrines irrelevant to the modem +Christian, but vital guidelines to the purity of the Christian +faith, the orthodox teaching of the living Church.</p> +<p>Earlier in his career, Thomas had been asked by the archbishop +of Palermo to write a short work that could be memorized, dealing +with the articles of faith “from the Creed of the +Fathers” (i.e., the Apostles’ Creed) and also the basic +errors concerning them; the archbishop apparently asked also for +the same presentation for all the sacraments of the Church. +<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote12',%20WPFootnote12%20)"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" +alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote12" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote12 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote12\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote12\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - Thomas complied with this -request in a most remarkable treatise in two parts: <i>De articulis fidei </i>and <i>De ecclesiae -sacramentis</i>. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote13', WPFootnote13 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> Thomas complied with this request in a most remarkable +treatise in two parts: <i>De articulis fidei</i> and <i>De +ecclesiae sacramentis</i>. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote13',%20WPFootnote13%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote13" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote13 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote13\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote13\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> -<i> </i>The wide popularity of this treatise is attested to by the 277 extant manuscripts -of this work. The six articles pertaining to the divinity of Christ and the six pertaining to his -humanity are set forth, and all the errors concerning the twelve articles of the Creed are briefly -named and refuted. Although the sacraments of the Church are implicit in the fourth article of -the Creed, they are discussed separately in the second part of the treatise, because the archbishop -explicitly asked for a special discussion of the sacraments and the heresies concerning them. -Thomas’ knowledge of the various heresies in the history of the Church is most remarkable. All -of these same heresies are again discussed in his commentary on John’s Gospel. That is why St. -Thomas says in the Prologue, “[This Gospel] refutes all heresies.” The numerous heresies of the -past ought to be of great concern to the modern Christian so that he may avoid all taint of them -in his own, personal belief. A conscious affirmation of belief in the truth of revealed teaching that -developed in the living Church guided by the Spirit of Christ can bring us into a deeper and more -meaningful awareness of being united with the Eternal Truth. In this commentary, Thomas is -concerned above all with bolstering the faith of the hearer or reader, or, as he put it, “to confirm -the Catholic Truth.”</p> -<p style="text-align: justify">In other words, there are four goals Thomas aimed to achieve in his commentary on St. John:</p> +//]]> +</script> The wide popularity of this treatise is attested to by +the 277 extant manuscripts of this work. The six articles +pertaining to the divinity of Christ and the six pertaining to his +humanity are set forth, and all the errors concerning the twelve +articles of the Creed are briefly named and refuted. Although the +sacraments of the Church are implicit in the fourth article of the +Creed, they are discussed separately in the second part of the +treatise, because the archbishop explicitly asked for a special +discussion of the sacraments and the heresies concerning them. +Thomas’ knowledge of the various heresies in the history of +the Church is most remarkable. All of these same heresies are again +discussed in his commentary on John’s Gospel. That is why St. +Thomas says in the Prologue, “[This Gospel] refutes all +heresies.” The numerous heresies of the past ought to be of +great concern to the modern Christian so that he may avoid all +taint of them in his own, personal belief. A conscious affirmation +of belief in the truth of revealed teaching that developed in the +living Church guided by the Spirit of Christ can bring us into a +deeper and more meaningful awareness of being united with the +Eternal Truth. In this commentary, Thomas is concerned above all +with bolstering the faith of the hearer or reader, or, as he put +it, “to confirm the Catholic Truth.”</p> +<p style="text-align: justify">In other words, there are four goals +Thomas aimed to achieve in his commentary on St. John:</p> <ol> -<li>determination of the literal, or historical, sense of the narrative; -<li>explanation of the spiritual sense as found in the Old Testament (allegorical sense), the goals -of our own life in imitating Jesus (moral sense), and life of the “kingdom” here and hereafter (anagogical sense); -<li>refutation of all error through the testimony of the inspired Word of God; -<li>confirmation of the true Catholic Faith given to us by God through his Church, the Body of Christ. +<li>determination of the literal, or historical, sense of the +narrative;</li> +<li>explanation of the spiritual sense as found in the Old +Testament (allegorical sense), the goals of our own life in +imitating Jesus (moral sense), and life of the +“kingdom” here and hereafter (anagogical sense);</li> +<li>refutation of all error through the testimony of the inspired +Word of God;</li> +<li>confirmation of the true Catholic Faith given to us by God +through his Church, the Body of Christ.</li> </ol> -<p>These are the same goals Thomas had set for himself in composing the <i>Catena Aurea, -</i>particularly in the <i>Catena </i>on John’s Gospel, which was composed only four or five years -earlier. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote14', WPFootnote14 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +<p>These are the same goals Thomas had set for himself in composing +the <i>Catena Aurea,</i> particularly in the <i>Catena</i> on +John’s Gospel, which was composed only four or five years +earlier. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote14',%20WPFootnote14%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote14" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote14 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote14\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote14\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> -</p> -<p>There are four outstanding features that will be noticed as one studies the commentary of Thomas -on the Gospel of John. First, Thomas had an extraordinary knowledge of the whole Bible. It has -been said, not without likelihood, that Thomas memorized the entire Bible during the year he was -confined to his family castle at Roccasecca, 1244-45. This is not at all difficult to believe. His -memory was far superior to any man-made concordance of the Bible. Thomas always saw the -<i>unity </i>of divine revelation. It was the unity of <i>sacra doctrina </i>as a single “science.” -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote15', WPFootnote15 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script></p> +<p>There are four outstanding features that will be noticed as one +studies the commentary of Thomas on the Gospel of John. First, +Thomas had an extraordinary knowledge of the whole Bible. It has +been said, not without likelihood, that Thomas memorized the entire +Bible during the year he was confined to his family castle at +Roccasecca, 1244-45. This is not at all difficult to believe. His +memory was far superior to any man-made concordance of the Bible. +Thomas always saw the <i>unity</i> of divine revelation. It was the +unity of <i>sacra doctrina</i> as a single “science.” +<a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote15',%20WPFootnote15%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote15" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote15 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote15\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote15\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - The -“orthodox” teaching of Christ, Son of the Living God, cannot be anything but <i>one. </i>Because of -this unity, Thomas could use any one part of Sacred Scripture to explain and illumine any other -part. Thus Thomas could use the teaching of St. Paul and the Psalms to explain the text of John. -This use of one part of revelation to illumine another has been aptly called “the analogy of faith” -(<i>secundum rationern fidei, </i>as St. Paul says in Romans 12:6). -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote16', WPFootnote16 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> The “orthodox” teaching of Christ, Son of the +Living God, cannot be anything but <i>one.</i> Because of this +unity, Thomas could use any one part of Sacred Scripture to explain +and illumine any other part. Thus Thomas could use the teaching of +St. Paul and the Psalms to explain the text of John. This use of +one part of revelation to illumine another has been aptly called +“the analogy of faith” (<i>secundum rationern +fidei,</i> as St. Paul says in Romans 12:6). <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote16',%20WPFootnote16%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote16" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote16 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote16\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote16\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> -</p> -<p>Second, Thomas had an unusual knowledge of the Latin and Greek Fathers of the Church. This -knowledge, no doubt aided by his work on the <i>Catena Aurea, is </i>brought to bear on every difficult -question or obscure passage in John, even when it is a question of chronology, geography, Jewish -customs, or language. The medieval mind associated words, quotations and parallels with -uncanny facility, always trying to find the best pertinent quotation from the proper authorities -(<i>auctoritates</i>)<i>. </i>Great weight, sometimes of probative value, was always given to the recognized -<i>auctoritates, </i>which, in theology were always the Bible and the <i>sancti, </i>meaning recognized or -canonized Doctors of the Church, who were the <i>regula fidei </i>(“the rule of faith”), the “norms” of -Christian belief. Thomas’ knowledge of these Doctors was prodigious. The contemporaries of -Thomas relied heavily on all available works of the Latin Fathers, especially those of St. -Augustine. But, as has been pointed out earlier, Thomas not only accepted the eminent authority -of St. Augustine, but also had a wealth of Greek sources from which to draw, including the early -Ecumenical Councils of the Church, whose <i>Acts </i>were largely neglected or forgotten in the Latin -Middle Ages. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote17', WPFootnote17 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script></p> +<p>Second, Thomas had an unusual knowledge of the Latin and Greek +Fathers of the Church. This knowledge, no doubt aided by his work +on the <i>Catena Aurea, is</i> brought to bear on every difficult +question or obscure passage in John, even when it is a question of +chronology, geography, Jewish customs, or language. The medieval +mind associated words, quotations and parallels with uncanny +facility, always trying to find the best pertinent quotation from +the proper authorities (<i>auctoritates</i>)<i>.</i> Great weight, +sometimes of probative value, was always given to the recognized +<i>auctoritates,</i> which, in theology were always the Bible and +the <i>sancti,</i> meaning recognized or canonized Doctors of the +Church, who were the <i>regula fidei</i> (“the rule of +faith”), the “norms” of Christian belief. +Thomas’ knowledge of these Doctors was prodigious. The +contemporaries of Thomas relied heavily on all available works of +the Latin Fathers, especially those of St. Augustine. But, as has +been pointed out earlier, Thomas not only accepted the eminent +authority of St. Augustine, but also had a wealth of Greek sources +from which to draw, including the early Ecumenical Councils of the +Church, whose <i>Acts</i> were largely neglected or forgotten in +the Latin Middle Ages. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote17',%20WPFootnote17%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote17" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote17 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote17\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote17\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> -</p> -<p>Third, Thomas was, after all, an outstanding theologian for any season. His theology was not only -biblical and patristic, but also logical and philosophical. While he absorbed and refined the -philosophy of Aristotle, newly translated from the Greek, he never put this philosophy ahead of -his Catholic faith. Rather he used that philosophy <i>in obsequium fidei </i>(Phil 2:17), as a “handmaid -of theology.” His comprehension of Aristotle and his use of the scholastic method are among the -glories of the Middle Ages. In St. Thomas we find an exceptionally gifted mind carefully honed -to human perfection by self-discipline, long study, and clear thinking. This was natural talent, -ranked by many as a true genius, brought to the highest human perfection by the grace of God.</p> -<p>Finally, Friar Thomas d’Aquino was a saint, one of the great saints in the Latin Church. A basic -principle of Thomas’ theology is that “grace perfects nature”; that is, the grace of God never -destroys or replaces nature, but builds upon it. For St. Thomas, there is in divine providence a -certain kind of proportion between God’s gifts of nature and his gifts of grace. Even when we -accept this principle with all the necessary qualifications needed, we can readily see that in the -mind and heart of St. Thomas, God’s grace abundantly perfected an already great man. Not only -did Thomas meditate prayerfully on the Sacred Scriptures, but lie drew from them substantial -nourishment for his soul. This process of enrichment can be seen conspicuously in the -commentary on John, particularly the section dealing with the “Last Discourse” of Jesus to his -disciples at the Last Supper, collected in “the sayings of Jesus” in chapters 14 to 17. Here -Thomas’ discussion of the Son’s procession from the Father while being consubstantially one -with the Father, is precise, illuminating, and brilliant; the mission of the Holy Spirit from the -Father <i>and </i>from the Son (<i>Filioque</i>) is clearly demonstrated against the Greek Orthodox who used -this question as one of the many issues that separated them from Rome, initially in the ninth, and -decisively in the eleventh century. But above all, the indwelling of the Holy Trinity in the hearts -of the faithful is alive and vital; the extraordinary love Jesus had for his faithful disciples is -movingly real and dynamic. In this commentary on John we have all the elements of a real -masterpiece of its kind in medieval literature.</p> -<p>St. Thomas was very much impressed by the force and absolute veracity of the Gospel -proclaimed by John: “This disciple is the one who vouches for these things and has written them -down, and we know that his testimony is true” (Jn 21:24). St. Thomas comments that the -Evangelist makes this statement “in the person of the whole Church (<i>in persona totius Ecclesiae</i>)<i> -</i>from whom this Gospel is received [by us].” The Evangelist himself knows the veracity of his -narrative, and even St. Paul condemns those who would preach a gospel other than the one he -had received (see Gal 1:9). The firmness and stability of our Christian faith is the authority of -God speaking through Evangelists, Apostles and other authors of the canonical Books of -Scripture. Their testimony leaves us without any doubt as to our faith, because “the Canonical -Scriptures alone are the rule of faith.” -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote18', WPFootnote18 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script></p> +<p>Third, Thomas was, after all, an outstanding theologian for any +season. His theology was not only biblical and patristic, but also +logical and philosophical. While he absorbed and refined the +philosophy of Aristotle, newly translated from the Greek, he never +put this philosophy ahead of his Catholic faith. Rather he used +that philosophy <i>in obsequium fidei</i> (Phil 2:17), as a +“handmaid of theology.” His comprehension of Aristotle +and his use of the scholastic method are among the glories of the +Middle Ages. In St. Thomas we find an exceptionally gifted mind +carefully honed to human perfection by self-discipline, long study, +and clear thinking. This was natural talent, ranked by many as a +true genius, brought to the highest human perfection by the grace +of God.</p> +<p>Finally, Friar Thomas d’Aquino was a saint, one of the +great saints in the Latin Church. A basic principle of +Thomas’ theology is that “grace perfects nature”; +that is, the grace of God never destroys or replaces nature, but +builds upon it. For St. Thomas, there is in divine providence a +certain kind of proportion between God’s gifts of nature and +his gifts of grace. Even when we accept this principle with all the +necessary qualifications needed, we can readily see that in the +mind and heart of St. Thomas, God’s grace abundantly +perfected an already great man. Not only did Thomas meditate +prayerfully on the Sacred Scriptures, but lie drew from them +substantial nourishment for his soul. This process of enrichment +can be seen conspicuously in the commentary on John, particularly +the section dealing with the “Last Discourse” of Jesus +to his disciples at the Last Supper, collected in “the +sayings of Jesus” in chapters 14 to 17. Here Thomas’ +discussion of the Son’s procession from the Father while +being consubstantially one with the Father, is precise, +illuminating, and brilliant; the mission of the Holy Spirit from +the Father <i>and</i> from the Son (<i>Filioque</i>) is clearly +demonstrated against the Greek Orthodox who used this question as +one of the many issues that separated them from Rome, initially in +the ninth, and decisively in the eleventh century. But above all, +the indwelling of the Holy Trinity in the hearts of the faithful is +alive and vital; the extraordinary love Jesus had for his faithful +disciples is movingly real and dynamic. In this commentary on John +we have all the elements of a real masterpiece of its kind in +medieval literature.</p> +<p>St. Thomas was very much impressed by the force and absolute +veracity of the Gospel proclaimed by John: “This disciple is +the one who vouches for these things and has written them down, and +we know that his testimony is true” (Jn 21:24). St. Thomas +comments that the Evangelist makes this statement “in the +person of the whole Church (<i>in persona totius Ecclesiae</i>)from +whom this Gospel is received [by us].” The Evangelist himself +knows the veracity of his narrative, and even St. Paul condemns +those who would preach a gospel other than the one he had received +(see Gal 1:9). The firmness and stability of our Christian faith is +the authority of God speaking through Evangelists, Apostles and +other authors of the canonical Books of Scripture. Their testimony +leaves us without any doubt as to our faith, because “the +Canonical Scriptures alone are the rule of faith.” <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote18',%20WPFootnote18%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote18" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote18 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote18\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote18\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - This <i>sola scriptura </i>of which St. Thomas speaks is far -different from the <i>sola scriptura </i>(“only the Bible”) of the Reformers. This battle cry was made -famous by Luther, who insisted that what is not contained in the Bible is not “of faith.” But -Luther and Thomas (or any other medieval theologian) meant two different things by the word -<i>Bible, </i>or <i>Sacred Scriptures. </i>For Luther and the Reformers the Bible was thought of as a finished, -edited, and (by then) printed collection, while Thomas and the medieval theologians meant the -Sacred Word <i>together with </i>the gloss of the Fathers, liturgy, and the living Church. The -Reformers thought of “The Bible” completely devoid of a history and a historical context, devoid -of transmission and development; in short, they thought of “The Bible” distinct from the Church. -Thus in the face of this misunderstanding, the Council of Trent spoke as <i>though </i>there were two -sources of our faith: “the written books and the unwritten traditions.” -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote19', WPFootnote19 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> This <i>sola scriptura</i> of which St. Thomas speaks is +far different from the <i>sola scriptura</i> (“only the +Bible”) of the Reformers. This battle cry was made famous by +Luther, who insisted that what is not contained in the Bible is not +“of faith.” But Luther and Thomas (or any other +medieval theologian) meant two different things by the word +<i>Bible,</i> or <i>Sacred Scriptures.</i> For Luther and the +Reformers the Bible was thought of as a finished, edited, and (by +then) printed collection, while Thomas and the medieval theologians +meant the Sacred Word <i>together with</i> the gloss of the +Fathers, liturgy, and the living Church. The Reformers thought of +“The Bible” completely devoid of a history and a +historical context, devoid of transmission and development; in +short, they thought of “The Bible” distinct from the +Church. Thus in the face of this misunderstanding, the Council of +Trent spoke as <i>though</i> there were two sources of our faith: +“the written books and the unwritten traditions.” +<a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote19',%20WPFootnote19%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote19" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote19 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote19\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote19\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - But even this manner of -speaking was a concession to a false dichotomy that was historically conditioned. The Second -Vatican Council, however, described these two sources” more traditionally as a single mirror -(<i>veluti speculum sunt</i>)<i> </i>reflecting both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote20', WPFootnote20 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script> But even this manner of speaking was a concession to a +false dichotomy that was historically conditioned. The Second +Vatican Council, however, described these two sources” more +traditionally as a single mirror (<i>veluti speculum sunt</i>) +reflecting both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote20',%20WPFootnote20%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote20" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote20 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote20\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote20\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> -</p> -<p>Historically speaking, the revelation given by God and received by the chosen people was prior -to any scriptural document. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were given the message of salvation long -before there was any question of a written Torah. Christ’s message of salvation was accepted by -the Apostles, disciples, and early Christians for a quarter of a century before the first fraction of -the New Testament was written—and this by St. Paul (1 Thessalonians, probably at the beginning -of 52 A.D.). We must always remember that the Canon of the New Testament was not -established as an inspired unit until 382 A.D., at the earliest. That is, the living Church existed -long before the New Testament was “written,” and it existed for 350 years before the present -books were collected into an exclusive and canonical unity. For this reason, St. Thomas could -speak of the “whole Church from whom this Gospel is received.”</p> -<p>Finally, a word should be said in aid of a fruitful reading of St. Thomas’ commentary on John. -Although the pericope or section commented upon in every “Lecture” is printed in full at the -head of the commentary, it would be best to procure a second copy of the whole text and read the -particular chapter in full before proceeding to the comment. It is of utmost importance to follow -the <i>divisions </i>of the text made by St. Thomas and always keep the context well in view. The -lemmata, or phrases commented upon, are clearly set off from the comment by the printer. Unless -the particular lemma is constantly related to the context as a whole, one can easily get lost in the -forest of words, cross references, and quotations. Since <i>order </i>and <i>division </i>are such important -elements in the scholastic method, these must be continuously related to the <i>whole, </i>whether it -be a collection of chapters, an individual chapter, part of a chapter, a parable, narrative, pericope, -or sentence. Those who wish to obtain the greatest understanding of the Sacred Text might well -augment the study of St. Thomas’ “theological sense” of John with a modern commentary, such -as the outstanding commentary by Father Raymond Brown in the Anchor Bible (2 vols.).</p> -<p>For the fruitful reading of St. Thomas’ commentary on John, we should further note that -throughout the long history of the Church, listeners and readers of tile Sacred Text have always -been encouraged to prepare their minds and souls for a fruitful reception of the Word. The Word -of God, like the seed in the parable (Lk 8:15), needs to be received in “good ground” in order to -yield fruit a hundredfold. The reception of anything, according to the ancient philosophers, -depends on the condition of the receiver. The Word of God is Spirit (Jn 6:63), and only the Holy -Spirit cdn prepare the soul for fruitful reception of the Word. In the solemn proclamation of the -Gospel in the Liturgy of the Word, the Church prays for the Deacon that the Lord be in his heart -and on his lips in order to announce the Holy Gospel of Peace. -<a href="javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote21', WPFootnote21 )"><img src="footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border="0"></a> -<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//]]> +</script></p> +<p>Historically speaking, the revelation given by God and received +by the chosen people was prior to any scriptural document. Abraham, +Isaac, and Jacob were given the message of salvation long before +there was any question of a written Torah. Christ’s message +of salvation was accepted by the Apostles, disciples, and early +Christians for a quarter of a century before the first fraction of +the New Testament was written—and this by St. Paul (1 +Thessalonians, probably at the beginning of 52 A.D.). We must +always remember that the Canon of the New Testament was not +established as an inspired unit until 382 A.D., at the earliest. +That is, the living Church existed long before the New Testament +was “written,” and it existed for 350 years before the +present books were collected into an exclusive and canonical unity. +For this reason, St. Thomas could speak of the “whole Church +from whom this Gospel is received.”</p> +<p>Finally, a word should be said in aid of a fruitful reading of +St. Thomas’ commentary on John. Although the pericope or +section commented upon in every “Lecture” is printed in +full at the head of the commentary, it would be best to procure a +second copy of the whole text and read the particular chapter in +full before proceeding to the comment. It is of utmost importance +to follow the <i>divisions</i> of the text made by St. Thomas and +always keep the context well in view. The lemmata, or phrases +commented upon, are clearly set off from the comment by the +printer. Unless the particular lemma is constantly related to the +context as a whole, one can easily get lost in the forest of words, +cross references, and quotations. Since <i>order</i> and +<i>division</i> are such important elements in the scholastic +method, these must be continuously related to the <i>whole,</i> +whether it be a collection of chapters, an individual chapter, part +of a chapter, a parable, narrative, pericope, or sentence. Those +who wish to obtain the greatest understanding of the Sacred Text +might well augment the study of St. Thomas’ +“theological sense” of John with a modern commentary, +such as the outstanding commentary by Father Raymond Brown in the +Anchor Bible (2 vols.).</p> +<p>For the fruitful reading of St. Thomas’ commentary on +John, we should further note that throughout the long history of +the Church, listeners and readers of tile Sacred Text have always +been encouraged to prepare their minds and souls for a fruitful +reception of the Word. The Word of God, like the seed in the +parable (Lk 8:15), needs to be received in “good +ground” in order to yield fruit a hundredfold. The reception +of anything, according to the ancient philosophers, depends on the +condition of the receiver. The Word of God is Spirit (Jn 6:63), and +only the Holy Spirit cdn prepare the soul for fruitful reception of +the Word. In the solemn proclamation of the Gospel in the Liturgy +of the Word, the Church prays for the Deacon that the Lord be in +his heart and on his lips in order to announce the Holy Gospel of +Peace. <a href= +"javascript:WPShow('WPFootnote21',%20WPFootnote21%20)"><img src= +"footnoteicon.gif" alt="Footnote" width="16" height="14" border= +"0" /></a> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"> +//<![CDATA[ if( bInlineFloats ) { document.write( '<span id="WPFootnote21" class="WPFloatStyle">' ); document.write( WPFootnote21 ); - document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote21\')">Close</a>' ); - document.write( '</span>' ); + document.write( '<br><a href="javascript:WPHide(\'WPFootnote21\')">Close<\/a>' ); + document.write( '<\/span>' ); } -</script> - Preparing one’s mind and heart -by prayer and recollection is of greatest importance for the reception of God’s message for us. -This message is directed primarily to us as God’s chosen people, the pilgrim Church on earth, -and through the Church to us as individuals beloved by God and “purchased at a great price” (1 -Cor 6:20). The message of salvation is addressed to us individually and collectively, and we both -individually and collectively must attune our minds and hearts to the Spirit. “The Advocate, the -Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and remind you -of all I have said to you” (Jn 14:26). The Holy Spirit speaks to our hearts through the Scriptures, -inspired and animated by him. The Scriptures as a spiritual resource cannot be dissociated from -personal prayer and cultivation of our sacramental life in the Church. Being receptive is the -important thing as we begin our study.</p> -<p>Finally, the power of reading or hearing the Sacred Scriptures is so great that it actually forgives -sins. Apart from “the Sacraments of the faith” (<i>sacramenta fidei</i>),<i> </i>it is one of the many ways by -which our many sins are forgiven. The Fathers of the Church have always listed—along with -almsgiving, contrition, and good works—the special efficacy of reading the Scriptures for the -forgiveness of sins. The new liturgy of the Mass prompted by the Second Vatican Council still -retains the ancient prayer: “May the words of the Gospel wipe away our sins.” The humble and -contrite reading of any part of the Scriptures wipes away sin because the power of the Word is -the power of God, who alone can forgive sins. Thus we should always approach the Scriptures -with a “humble and contrite heart.” The Psalmist declares, “A contrite and humbled heart, 0 God, -you will not despise” (Ps 50:19). God always answers a humble and contrite heart in order to -glorify himself in us, just as the Father is always glorified in the Son. “Whatever you ask for in -my name I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son” Qn 14:13). This “glory” of the -Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit is sometimes called the indwelling of the Trinity within -our souls. It is the “conformity” of our whole being to the Father through the Word animated by -the Spirit. In this conformity of our innermost being with the splendor of God lies the whole -perfection of the Christian life. In this perfection consists the glory and splendor of God himself. -This union of one’s deepest self and the innermost being of God is the answer to the prayer of -Jesus to the Father: “That they may be one, as we also are one” (Jn 17:11).</p> -<p>From this it follows that the study of St. Thomas’ commentary on St. John’s Gospel is richly -rewarding in healing our wounds and leading us to greater union with the Father of our Lord -Jesus Christ, whose message of salvation is here proclaimed by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” -(Jn 20:2). For our guide we can have none better than the Angelic Doctor, whom Jesus loved.</p> -<p style="text-align: right; margin-bottom: 0.125in">James A. Weisheipl, O.P. -<br>Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies -<br>Toronto, Canada</p> -<br> -<hr> -<A NAME="02"><p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style="font-weight: bold">PROLOGUE</span></p> -<p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-right: 0.5in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><i>I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, and the whole house was full -of his majesty, and the things that were under him filled the temple.</i> (Is 6:1)</p> -<p>1 These are the words of a contemplative, and if we regard them as spoken by John the -Evangelist they apply quite well to showing the nature of this Gospel. For as Augustine says in -his work, <i>On the Agreement of the Evangelists: </i>“The other Evangelists instruct us in their -Gospels on the active life; but John in his Gospel instructs us also on the contemplative life.”</p> -<p>The contemplation of John is described above in three ways, in keeping with the threefold -manner in which he contemplated the Lord Jesus. It is described as high, full, and perfect. It is -high: <span style="font-weight: bold">I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne; </span>it is full: <span style="font-weight: bold">and the whole house was -full of his majesty; </span>and it was perfect: <span style="font-weight: bold">and the things that were under him filled the temple.</span></p> -<p>2 As to the first, we must understand that the Height and sublimity of contemplation consists -most of all in the contemplation and knowledge of God. “Lift up your eyes on high, and see who -has created these things” (Is 40:26). A man lifts up his eyes on high when he sees and -contemplates the Creator of all things. Now since John rose above whatever had been -created—mountains, heavens, angels—and reached the Creator of all, as Augustine says, it is -clear that his contemplation was most high. Thus, <span style="font-weight: bold">I saw the Lord. </span>And because, as John himself -says below (12:41), “Isaiah said this because he had seen his glory,” that is, the glory of Christ, -“and spoke of him,” the Lord <span style="font-weight: bold">seated on a high and lofty throne </span>is Christ.</p> -<p>Now a fourfold height is indicated in this contemplation of John. A height of authority; hence -he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">I saw the Lord. </span>A height of eternity; when he says, seated. One of dignity, or nobility -of nature; so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">on a high throne. </span>And a height of incomprehensible truth; when he says, -lofty. It is in these four ways that the early philosophers arrived at the knowledge of God.</p> -<p>3 Some attained to a knowledge of God through his authority, and this is the most efficacious -way. For we see the things in nature acting for an end, and attaining to ends which are both useful -and certain. And since they lack intelligence, they are unable to direct themselves, but must be -directed and moved by one directing them, and who possesses an intellect. Thus it is that the -movement of the things of nature toward a certain end indicates the existence of something -higher by which the things of nature are directed to an end and governed. And so, since the whole -course of nature advances to an end in an orderly way and is directed, we have to posit something -higher w1iich directs and governs them as Lord; and this is God. This authority in governing is -shown to be in the Word of God when he says, Lord. Thus the Psalm (88:10) says: “You rule the -power of the sea, and you still the swelling of its waves,” as though saying: You are the Lord and -govern all things. John shows that he knows this about the Word when he says below (1:11), “He -came unto his own,” i.e., to the world, since the whole universe is his own.</p> -<p>4 Others came to a knowledge of God from his eternity. They saw that whatever was in things -was changeable, and that the more noble something is in the grades of being, so much the less -it has of mutability. For example, the lower bodies are mutable both as to their substance and to -place, while the heavenly bodies, which are more noble, are immutable in substance and change -only with respect to place. We can clearly conclude from this that the first principle of all things, -which is supreme and more noble, is changeless and eternal. The prophet suggests this eternity -of the Word when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">seated, </span>i.e., presiding without any change and eternally. “Your throne, -O God, is forever and ever” (Ps 44:7); “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever” -(Heb 13:8). John points to this eternity when he says below (1:1), “In the beginning was the -Word.”</p> -<p>5 Still others came to a knowledge of God from the dignity of God; and these were the Platonists. -They noted that everything which is something by participation is reduced to what is the same -thing by essence, as to the first and highest. Thus, all things which are fiery by participation are -reduced to fire, which is such by its essence. And so since all things which exist participate in -existence (<i>esse</i>)<i> </i>and are beings by participation, there must necessarily be at the summit of all -things something which is existence (<i>esse</i>)<i> </i>by its essence, i.e., whose essence is its existence. -And this is God, who is the most sufficient, the most eminent, and the most perfect cause of the -whole of existence, from, whom all things that are participate existence (<i>esse</i>)<i>. </i>This dignity is -shown in the words, <span style="font-weight: bold">on a high throne, </span>which, according to Denis, refer to the divine nature. -“The Lord is high above all nations” (Ps 112:4). John shows us this dignity when he says below -(1:1), “the Word was God,” with “Word” as subject and “God” as the predicate.</p> -<p>6 Yet others arrived at a knowledge of God from the incomprehensibility of truth. All the truth -which our intellect is able to grasp is finite, since according to Augustine, “everything that is -known is bounded by the comprehension of the one knowing”; and if it is bounded, it is -determined and particularized. Therefore, the first and supreme Truth, which surpasses every -intellect, must necessarily be incomprehensible and infinite; and this is God. [fence the Psalm -(8:2) says, “Your greatness is above the heavens,” i.e., above every created intellect, angelic and -human. The Apostle says this in the words, “He dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Tim 6:16). -This incomprehensibility of Truth is shown to us in the word, <span style="font-weight: bold">lofty, </span>that is, above all the -knowledge of the created intellect. John implies this incomprehensibility to us when he says -below (1:18), “No one has ever seen God.”</p> -<p>Thus, the contemplation of John was high as regards authority, eternity, dignity, and the -incomprehensibility of the Word. And John has passed on this contemplation to us in his Gospel.</p> -<p>7 John’s contemplation was also full. Now contemplation is full when someone is able to -consider all the effects of a cause in the cause itself, that is, when he knows not only the essence -of the cause, but also its power, according as it can extend out to many things. Of this flowing -outward we read, “It overflows with wisdom, like the Pishon, and like the Tigris in the days of -the new fruits” (Sir 25:35); “The river of God is full with water,” since the divine wisdom has -depth in relation to its knowledge of all things (Ps 65:9). “With you from the beginning is -wisdom, who knows your works” (Wis 9:9).</p> -<p>Since John the Evangelist was raised up to the contemplation of the nature of the divine Word -and of his essence when he said, “In the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with God,” -he immediately tells us of the power of the Word as it extends to all things, saying, “Through him -all things came into being.” Thus his contemplation was full. And so after the prophet had <span style="font-weight: bold">said, -I saw the Lord seated, </span>he added something about his power, <span style="font-weight: bold">and the whole house was full of -his majesty, </span>that is, the whole fullness of things and of the universe is from the majesty and -power of God, through whom all things were made, and by whose light all the men coming into -this world are enlightened. “The earth and its fullness are the Lord’s” (Ps 23:1).</p> -<p>8 The contemplation of John was also perfect. For contemplation is perfect when the one -contemplating is led and raised to the height of the thing contemplated. Should he remain at a -lower level, then no matter how high the things which he might contemplate, the contemplation -would not be perfect. So in order that it be perfect it is necessary that it rise and attain the end of -the thing contemplated, adhering and assenting by affection and understanding to the truth -contemplated. Job (37:16) says, “Do you not know the path of the clouds,” that is, the -contemplation of those preaching, “how perfect they are?” inasmuch as they adhere firmly by -affection and understanding to contemplating the highest truth.</p> -<p>Since John not only taught how Christ Jesus, the Word of God, is God, raised above all things, -and how all things were made through him, but also that we are sanctified by him and adhere to -him by the grace which he pours into us, he says below (1:16), “Of his fullness we have all -received - indeed, grace in return for grace.” It is therefore apparent that his contemplation is -perfect. This perfection is shown in the addition, <span style="font-weight: bold">and the things that were under him filled the -temple. </span>For “the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor 11:3). The things that are under Christ are the -sacraments of his humanity, through which the faithful are filled with the fullness of grace. In this -way, then, <span style="font-weight: bold">the things that were under him filled the temple, </span>i.e., the faithful, who are the holy -temple of God (1 Cor 3:17) insofar as through the sacraments of his humanity all the faithful of -Christ receive from the fullness of his grace.</p> +//]]> +</script> Preparing one’s mind and heart by prayer and +recollection is of greatest importance for the reception of +God’s message for us. This message is directed primarily to +us as God’s chosen people, the pilgrim Church on earth, and +through the Church to us as individuals beloved by God and +“purchased at a great price” (1 Cor 6:20). The message +of salvation is addressed to us individually and collectively, and +we both individually and collectively must attune our minds and +hearts to the Spirit. “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom +the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and +remind you of all I have said to you” (Jn 14:26). The Holy +Spirit speaks to our hearts through the Scriptures, inspired and +animated by him. The Scriptures as a spiritual resource cannot be +dissociated from personal prayer and cultivation of our sacramental +life in the Church. Being receptive is the important thing as we +begin our study.</p> +<p>Finally, the power of reading or hearing the Sacred Scriptures +is so great that it actually forgives sins. Apart from “the +Sacraments of the faith” (<i>sacramenta fidei</i>), it is one +of the many ways by which our many sins are forgiven. The Fathers +of the Church have always listed—along with almsgiving, +contrition, and good works—the special efficacy of reading +the Scriptures for the forgiveness of sins. The new liturgy of the +Mass prompted by the Second Vatican Council still retains the +ancient prayer: “May the words of the Gospel wipe away our +sins.” The humble and contrite reading of any part of the +Scriptures wipes away sin because the power of the Word is the +power of God, who alone can forgive sins. Thus we should always +approach the Scriptures with a “humble and contrite +heart.” The Psalmist declares, “A contrite and humbled +heart, 0 God, you will not despise” (Ps 50:19). God always +answers a humble and contrite heart in order to glorify himself in +us, just as the Father is always glorified in the Son. +“Whatever you ask for in my name I will do, so that the +Father may be glorified in the Son” Qn 14:13). This +“glory” of the Father through the Son in the Holy +Spirit is sometimes called the indwelling of the Trinity within our +souls. It is the “conformity” of our whole being to the +Father through the Word animated by the Spirit. In this conformity +of our innermost being with the splendor of God lies the whole +perfection of the Christian life. In this perfection consists the +glory and splendor of God himself. This union of one’s +deepest self and the innermost being of God is the answer to the +prayer of Jesus to the Father: “That they may be one, as we +also are one” (Jn 17:11).</p> +<p>From this it follows that the study of St. Thomas’ +commentary on St. John’s Gospel is richly rewarding in +healing our wounds and leading us to greater union with the Father +of our Lord Jesus Christ, whose message of salvation is here +proclaimed by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn +20:2). For our guide we can have none better than the Angelic +Doctor, whom Jesus loved.</p> +<p style="text-align: right; margin-bottom: 0.125in">James A. +Weisheipl, O.P.<br /> +Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies<br /> +Toronto, Canada</p> +<br /> +<hr /> +<a name="02"></a> +<p style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.125in"><span style= +"font-weight: bold">PROLOGUE</span></p> +<p style= +"text-align: justify; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-right: 0.5in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> +<i>I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, and the whole +house was full of his majesty, and the things that were under him +filled the temple.</i> (Is 6:1)</p> +<p>1 These are the words of a contemplative, and if we regard them +as spoken by John the Evangelist they apply quite well to showing +the nature of this Gospel. For as Augustine says in his work, <i>On +the Agreement of the Evangelists:</i> “The other Evangelists +instruct us in their Gospels on the active life; but John in his +Gospel instructs us also on the contemplative life.”</p> +<p>The contemplation of John is described above in three ways, in +keeping with the threefold manner in which he contemplated the Lord +Jesus. It is described as high, full, and perfect. It is high: +<span style="font-weight: bold">I saw the Lord seated on a high and +lofty throne;</span> it is full: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and the whole house was full of his +majesty;</span> and it was perfect: <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and the things that were under him filled the +temple.</span></p> +<p>2 As to the first, we must understand that the Height and +sublimity of contemplation consists most of all in the +contemplation and knowledge of God. “Lift up your eyes on +high, and see who has created these things” (Is 40:26). A man +lifts up his eyes on high when he sees and contemplates the Creator +of all things. Now since John rose above whatever had been +created—mountains, heavens, angels—and reached the +Creator of all, as Augustine says, it is clear that his +contemplation was most high. Thus, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">I saw the Lord.</span> And because, as John +himself says below (12:41), “Isaiah said this because he had +seen his glory,” that is, the glory of Christ, “and +spoke of him,” the Lord <span style= +"font-weight: bold">seated on a high and lofty throne</span> is +Christ.</p> +<p>Now a fourfold height is indicated in this contemplation of +John. A height of authority; hence he says, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">I saw the Lord.</span> A height of eternity; +when he says, seated. One of dignity, or nobility of nature; so he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">on a high throne.</span> And +a height of incomprehensible truth; when he says, lofty. It is in +these four ways that the early philosophers arrived at the +knowledge of God.</p> +<p>3 Some attained to a knowledge of God through his authority, and +this is the most efficacious way. For we see the things in nature +acting for an end, and attaining to ends which are both useful and +certain. And since they lack intelligence, they are unable to +direct themselves, but must be directed and moved by one directing +them, and who possesses an intellect. Thus it is that the movement +of the things of nature toward a certain end indicates the +existence of something higher by which the things of nature are +directed to an end and governed. And so, since the whole course of +nature advances to an end in an orderly way and is directed, we +have to posit something higher w1iich directs and governs them as +Lord; and this is God. This authority in governing is shown to be +in the Word of God when he says, Lord. Thus the Psalm (88:10) says: +“You rule the power of the sea, and you still the swelling of +its waves,” as though saying: You are the Lord and govern all +things. John shows that he knows this about the Word when he says +below (1:11), “He came unto his own,” i.e., to the +world, since the whole universe is his own.</p> +<p>4 Others came to a knowledge of God from his eternity. They saw +that whatever was in things was changeable, and that the more noble +something is in the grades of being, so much the less it has of +mutability. For example, the lower bodies are mutable both as to +their substance and to place, while the heavenly bodies, which are +more noble, are immutable in substance and change only with respect +to place. We can clearly conclude from this that the first +principle of all things, which is supreme and more noble, is +changeless and eternal. The prophet suggests this eternity of the +Word when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">seated,</span> +i.e., presiding without any change and eternally. “Your +throne, O God, is forever and ever” (Ps 44:7); “Jesus +Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Heb 13:8). +John points to this eternity when he says below (1:1), “In +the beginning was the Word.”</p> +<p>5 Still others came to a knowledge of God from the dignity of +God; and these were the Platonists. They noted that everything +which is something by participation is reduced to what is the same +thing by essence, as to the first and highest. Thus, all things +which are fiery by participation are reduced to fire, which is such +by its essence. And so since all things which exist participate in +existence (<i>esse</i>) and are beings by participation, there must +necessarily be at the summit of all things something which is +existence (<i>esse</i>) by its essence, i.e., whose essence is its +existence. And this is God, who is the most sufficient, the most +eminent, and the most perfect cause of the whole of existence, +from, whom all things that are participate existence +(<i>esse</i>)<i>.</i> This dignity is shown in the words, +<span style="font-weight: bold">on a high throne,</span> which, +according to Denis, refer to the divine nature. “The Lord is +high above all nations” (Ps 112:4). John shows us this +dignity when he says below (1:1), “the Word was God,” +with “Word” as subject and “God” as the +predicate.</p> +<p>6 Yet others arrived at a knowledge of God from the +incomprehensibility of truth. All the truth which our intellect is +able to grasp is finite, since according to Augustine, +“everything that is known is bounded by the comprehension of +the one knowing”; and if it is bounded, it is determined and +particularized. Therefore, the first and supreme Truth, which +surpasses every intellect, must necessarily be incomprehensible and +infinite; and this is God. [fence the Psalm (8:2) says, “Your +greatness is above the heavens,” i.e., above every created +intellect, angelic and human. The Apostle says this in the words, +“He dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Tim 6:16). This +incomprehensibility of Truth is shown to us in the word, +<span style="font-weight: bold">lofty,</span> that is, above all +the knowledge of the created intellect. John implies this +incomprehensibility to us when he says below (1:18), “No one +has ever seen God.”</p> +<p>Thus, the contemplation of John was high as regards authority, +eternity, dignity, and the incomprehensibility of the Word. And +John has passed on this contemplation to us in his Gospel.</p> +<p>7 John’s contemplation was also full. Now contemplation is +full when someone is able to consider all the effects of a cause in +the cause itself, that is, when he knows not only the essence of +the cause, but also its power, according as it can extend out to +many things. Of this flowing outward we read, “It overflows +with wisdom, like the Pishon, and like the Tigris in the days of +the new fruits” (Sir 25:35); “The river of God is full +with water,” since the divine wisdom has depth in relation to +its knowledge of all things (Ps 65:9). “With you from the +beginning is wisdom, who knows your works” (Wis 9:9).</p> +<p>Since John the Evangelist was raised up to the contemplation of +the nature of the divine Word and of his essence when he said, +“In the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with +God,” he immediately tells us of the power of the Word as it +extends to all things, saying, “Through him all things came +into being.” Thus his contemplation was full. And so after +the prophet had <span style="font-weight: bold">said, I saw the +Lord seated,</span> he added something about his power, +<span style="font-weight: bold">and the whole house was full of his +majesty,</span> that is, the whole fullness of things and of the +universe is from the majesty and power of God, through whom all +things were made, and by whose light all the men coming into this +world are enlightened. “The earth and its fullness are the +Lord’s” (Ps 23:1).</p> +<p>8 The contemplation of John was also perfect. For contemplation +is perfect when the one contemplating is led and raised to the +height of the thing contemplated. Should he remain at a lower +level, then no matter how high the things which he might +contemplate, the contemplation would not be perfect. So in order +that it be perfect it is necessary that it rise and attain the end +of the thing contemplated, adhering and assenting by affection and +understanding to the truth contemplated. Job (37:16) says, +“Do you not know the path of the clouds,” that is, the +contemplation of those preaching, “how perfect they +are?” inasmuch as they adhere firmly by affection and +understanding to contemplating the highest truth.</p> +<p>Since John not only taught how Christ Jesus, the Word of God, is +God, raised above all things, and how all things were made through +him, but also that we are sanctified by him and adhere to him by +the grace which he pours into us, he says below (1:16), “Of +his fullness we have all received - indeed, grace in return for +grace.” It is therefore apparent that his contemplation is +perfect. This perfection is shown in the addition, <span style= +"font-weight: bold">and the things that were under him filled the +temple.</span> For “the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor +11:3). The things that are under Christ are the sacraments of his +humanity, through which the faithful are filled with the fullness +of grace. In this way, then, <span style="font-weight: bold">the +things that were under him filled the temple,</span> i.e., the +faithful, who are the holy temple of God (1 Cor 3:17) insofar as +through the sacraments of his humanity all the faithful of Christ +receive from the fullness of his grace.</p> <p>The contemplation of John was thus full, high, and perfect.</p> -<p>9 We should note, however, that these three characteristics of contemplation belong to the -different sciences in different ways. The perfection of contemplation is found in Moral Science, -which is concerned with the ultimate end. The fullness of contemplation is possessed by Natural -Science, which considers things as proceeding from God. Among the physical [natural] sciences, -the height of contemplation is found in Metaphysics. But the Gospel of John contains all together -what the above sciences have in a divided way, and so it is most perfect.</p> -<p>10 In this way then, from what has been said, we can understand the matter of this Gospel. For -while the other Evangelists treat principally of the mysteries of the humanity of Christ, John, -especially and above all, makes known the divinity of Christ in his Gospel, as we saw above. -Still, he does not ignore the mysteries of his humanity. He did this because, after the other -Evangelists had written their Gospels, heresies had arisen concerning the divinity of Christ, to -the effect that Christ was purely and simply a man, as Ebion and Cerinthus falsely thought. And -so John the Evangelist, who had drawn the truth about the divinity of the Word from the very -fountain-head of the divine breast, wrote this Gospel at the request of the faithful. And in it he -gives us the doctrine of the divinity of Christ and refutes all heresies.</p> -<p>The order of this Gospel is clear from the above. For John first shows us <span style="font-weight: bold">the Lord seated on a -high and lofty throne, </span>when he says below (1:1), “In the beginning was the Word.” He shows -secondly how <span style="font-weight: bold">the house was full of his majesty, </span>when he says, “through him all things came -into being” (1:3). Thirdly, he shows how the <span style="font-weight: bold">things that were under him filled the temple, -</span>when he says, “the Word was made flesh” (1:14). The end of this Gospel is also clear, and it is -that the faithful become the temple of God, and become filled with the majesty of God; and so -John says below (20:31), “These things are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the -Christ, the Son of God.”</p> -<p>The matter of this Gospel, the knowledge of the divinity of the Word, is clear, as well as its order -and end.</p> -<p>11 Then follows the condition of the author, who is described above in four ways: as to his name, -his virtue, his symbol, and his privilege. He is described as to name as John, the author of this -Gospel. “John” is interpreted as “in whom is grace,” since the secrets of the divinity cannot be -seen except by those who have the grace of God within themselves. “No one knows the deep -things of God but the Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:11).</p> -<p>As concerns his virtue, John <span style="font-weight: bold">saw the Lord seated, </span>because he was a virgin; for it is fitting that -such persons see the Lord: “Blessed are the pure in heart” (Mt 5:8).</p> -<p>He is described as to his symbol, for John is symbolized by an eagle. The other three Evangelists, -concerned with those things which Christ did in his flesh, are symbolized by animals which walk -on the earth, namely, by a man, a bull calf, and a lion. But John flies like an eagle above the -cloud of human weakness and looks upon the light of unchanging truth with the most lofty and -firm eyes of the heart. And gazing on the very deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which he is -equal to the Father, he has striven in this Gospel to confide this above all, to the extent that he -believed was sufficient for all. Concerning this flight of John it says in Job (39:27): “Will the -eagle,” that is, John, “fly up at your command?” And further on it says, “His eyes look far away,” -because the Word of God is seen in the bosom of the Father by the eye of the mind.</p> -<p>John is described as to privilege since, among the other disciples of the Lord, John was more -loved by Christ. Without mentioning his own name John refers to himself below (21:20) as “the -disciple whom Jesus loved.” And because secrets are revealed to friends, “I have called you -friends because everything I have heard from my father I have made known to you” (below -15:15), Jesus confided his secrets in a special way to that disciple who was specially loved. Thus -it says in Job (36:32): “From the savage,” that is, the proud, “he hides his light,” that is, Christ -hides the truth of his divinity, “and shows his friend,” that is, John, “that it belongs to him,” since -it is John who sees the light of the Incarnate Word more excellently and expresses it to us, saying -“He was the true light” (below 1:19).</p> -<p>Now the matter, order, end and author of this Gospel of the blessed John are clear.</p> +<p>9 We should note, however, that these three characteristics of +contemplation belong to the different sciences in different ways. +The perfection of contemplation is found in Moral Science, which is +concerned with the ultimate end. The fullness of contemplation is +possessed by Natural Science, which considers things as proceeding +from God. Among the physical [natural] sciences, the height of +contemplation is found in Metaphysics. But the Gospel of John +contains all together what the above sciences have in a divided +way, and so it is most perfect.</p> +<p>10 In this way then, from what has been said, we can understand +the matter of this Gospel. For while the other Evangelists treat +principally of the mysteries of the humanity of Christ, John, +especially and above all, makes known the divinity of Christ in his +Gospel, as we saw above. Still, he does not ignore the mysteries of +his humanity. He did this because, after the other Evangelists had +written their Gospels, heresies had arisen concerning the divinity +of Christ, to the effect that Christ was purely and simply a man, +as Ebion and Cerinthus falsely thought. And so John the Evangelist, +who had drawn the truth about the divinity of the Word from the +very fountain-head of the divine breast, wrote this Gospel at the +request of the faithful. And in it he gives us the doctrine of the +divinity of Christ and refutes all heresies.</p> +<p>The order of this Gospel is clear from the above. For John first +shows us <span style="font-weight: bold">the Lord seated on a high +and lofty throne,</span> when he says below (1:1), “In the +beginning was the Word.” He shows secondly how <span style= +"font-weight: bold">the house was full of his majesty,</span> when +he says, “through him all things came into being” +(1:3). Thirdly, he shows how the <span style= +"font-weight: bold">things that were under him filled the +temple,</span> when he says, “the Word was made flesh” +(1:14). The end of this Gospel is also clear, and it is that the +faithful become the temple of God, and become filled with the +majesty of God; and so John says below (20:31), “These things +are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the +Son of God.”</p> +<p>The matter of this Gospel, the knowledge of the divinity of the +Word, is clear, as well as its order and end.</p> +<p>11 Then follows the condition of the author, who is described +above in four ways: as to his name, his virtue, his symbol, and his +privilege. He is described as to name as John, the author of this +Gospel. “John” is interpreted as “in whom is +grace,” since the secrets of the divinity cannot be seen +except by those who have the grace of God within themselves. +“No one knows the deep things of God but the Spirit of +God” (1 Cor 2:11).</p> +<p>As concerns his virtue, John <span style="font-weight: bold">saw +the Lord seated,</span> because he was a virgin; for it is fitting +that such persons see the Lord: “Blessed are the pure in +heart” (Mt 5:8).</p> +<p>He is described as to his symbol, for John is symbolized by an +eagle. The other three Evangelists, concerned with those things +which Christ did in his flesh, are symbolized by animals which walk +on the earth, namely, by a man, a bull calf, and a lion. But John +flies like an eagle above the cloud of human weakness and looks +upon the light of unchanging truth with the most lofty and firm +eyes of the heart. And gazing on the very deity of our Lord Jesus +Christ, by which he is equal to the Father, he has striven in this +Gospel to confide this above all, to the extent that he believed +was sufficient for all. Concerning this flight of John it says in +Job (39:27): “Will the eagle,” that is, John, +“fly up at your command?” And further on it says, +“His eyes look far away,” because the Word of God is +seen in the bosom of the Father by the eye of the mind.</p> +<p>John is described as to privilege since, among the other +disciples of the Lord, John was more loved by Christ. Without +mentioning his own name John refers to himself below (21:20) as +“the disciple whom Jesus loved.” And because secrets +are revealed to friends, “I have called you friends because +everything I have heard from my father I have made known to +you” (below 15:15), Jesus confided his secrets in a special +way to that disciple who was specially loved. Thus it says in Job +(36:32): “From the savage,” that is, the proud, +“he hides his light,” that is, Christ hides the truth +of his divinity, “and shows his friend,” that is, John, +“that it belongs to him,” since it is John who sees the +light of the Incarnate Word more excellently and expresses it to +us, saying “He was the true light” (below 1:19).</p> +<p>Now the matter, order, end and author of this Gospel of the +blessed John are clear.</p> +</div> +</blockquote> </body> </html>
