Mercurial > hg > Aquinas
diff john/english/John7.html @ 31:25a799388159
originals from http://www.josephkenny.joyeurs.com/CDtexts/SSJohn.htm
| author | ht |
|---|---|
| date | Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:16:17 +0000 |
| parents | |
| children | 178aed5d2c3c |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/john/english/John7.html Tue Nov 24 20:16:17 2009 +0000 @@ -0,0 +1,1205 @@ +<html> +<head> +</head> +<body style=text-align:justify><blockquote> +<CENTER><p><span style="font-size: 60pt">7</span></p> +<p><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 1</span></p></CENTER> +<BLOCKQUOTE><p>1 After this, Jesus walked about in Galilee, for he did not want to walk in Judea because the Jews +sought to kill him. 2 Now it was close to the Jewish feast of Tabernacles. 3 So his brethren said +to him: “Leave this place, and go to Judea, so that your disciples also may see your works which +you perform. 4 Surely, no one works in secret if he wants to be publicly renowned. If you do +these things, reveal yourself to the world.” 5 For not even his brethren believed in him. 6 Jesus +therefore said to them: +<DD>“My time has not yet come, +<DD>but your time is always here. +<DD>7 The world cannot hate you, but me, it hates, +<DD>because I bear witness against it, for its works are evil. +<DD>8 You yourselves go up for this feast. +<DD>I, however, will not go up for this festival, because my time is not yet completed.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> +<p>1010 After our Lord considered the spiritual life and its food, he now treats of his instruction or +teaching, which, as mentioned above, is necessary for those who are spiritually reborn. First, he +shows the origin of his teaching; secondly, its usefulness (c 8 and onwards). As to the first, he +does three things. First, he mentions the place where he revealed the origin of his teaching; +secondly, the occasion for revealing this (v 11); and thirdly, his actual statement is given (v 16). +Three things are done about the first. First, we see Christ invited to go to the place where he +revealed the origin of his teaching; secondly, we see our Lord refuse (v 6); and thirdly, how Jesus +finally did go (v 9). As to the first, he does two things. First, he gives the reasons why they +encouraged Christ to go to Judea; secondly, he adds their exhortation (v 3). They were influenced +by three things to encourage Christ to go to Judea: first, by his lingering on [in Galilee] , +secondly, by his intention [not to travel in Judea] and thirdly, by the appropriateness of the time.</p> +<p>1011 They were influenced by Christ’s lingering on in Galilee, which showed that he wanted to +stay there. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">After this, </span>after teaching in Capernatim, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus walked about in +Galilee, </span>i.e., he set out from Capernaum, a city of Galilee, with the intention to journey +throughout this region. Our Lord lingered on so often in Galilee to show us that we should pass +from vices to virtues: “So you, son of man, prepare your belongings for exile, and go during the +day in their sight” (Ez 12:13).</p> +<p>1012 Then they were influenced by Christ’s intention, which he perhaps told them; hence he +says, <span style="font-weight: bold">for he did not want to walk in Judea, </span>the reason being, <span style="font-weight: bold">because the Jews sought to kill +him. </span>“The Jews tried all the harder to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath rest, but +even called God his own Father, making himself equal to God” (above 5:18).</p> +<p>But could not Christ still have gone among the Jews without being killed by them, as he did after +(c 8)? Three answers are given to this question. The first is given by Augustine, who says that +Christ did this because the time would come when some Christians would hide from those who +were persecuting them. And so they would not be criticized for this, our Lord wanted to console +us by setting a precedent himself in this matter. He also taught this in word, saying: “If they +persecute you in one town, flee to another” (Mt 10:23). Another answer is that Christ was both +God and man. By reason of his divinity, he could prevent his being injured by those persecuting +him. Yet, he did not want to do this all the time, for while this would have shown his divinity, +it might have cast doubt on his humanity. Therefore, he showed his humanity by sometimes +fleeing, as man, those who were persecuting him, to silence all those who would say that he was +not a true man. And he showed his divinity by sometimes walking among them unharmed, thus +refuting all those who say he was only a man. Thus, Chrysostom has another text, which reads: +“He could not, even if he wanted to, walk about Judea.” This is expressed in our human way, and +is the same as saying: Due to the danger of treachery, a person cannot go anywhere he might +wish. The third answer is that it was not yet the time for Christ’s passion. The time would come +when Christ would suffer, at the feast of the Passover, when the lamb was sacrificed, so that +victim would succeed victim: “Jesus knew that his time had come to leave this world for the +Father” (below 13:1).</p> +<p>1013 They were also influenced by the suitableness of the time, for it was a time for going to +Jerusalem. <span style="font-weight: bold">Now it was close to the Jewish feast of Tabernacles </span>(<i>scenopegia</i>).<i> Scenopegia</i> is<i> +</i>a Greek word, composed of <i>scenos, </i>which means “shade,” or “tent,” and <i>phagim, </i>which means +“to eat.” As if to say: It was the time in which they used to eat in their tents. For our Lord (Lv +23:41 ) had ordered the children of Israel to stay in their tents for seven days during the seventh +month, as a rerninder of the forty years they had lived in tents in the desert. This was the feast +the Jews were then celebrating. The Evangelist mentions this in order to show that some time had +already passed since the previous teaching about spiritual food. For it was near the Passover +when our Lord performed the miracle of the loaves, and this feast of Tabernacles is much later. +The Evangelist does not tell us what our Lord did in the intervening five months. We can see +from this that although Jesus was always performing miracles, as the last chapter says, the +Evangelist was mainly concerned with recording those matters over which the Jews argued and +with which they disagreed.</p> +<p>1014 Then (v 3), our Lord is urged on by his brethren. First, we are given their advice; secondly, +the reason for it (v 3b); and thirdly, the Evangelist mentions the cause of this reason (v 5).</p> +<p>1015 As to the first, the ones who urge Christ are mentioned; hence he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">So his brethren +said to him. </span>These were not brothers of the flesh or of the womb, as the blasphemous opinion +of Elvidius would have it. It is, indeed, offensive to the Catholic faith that the most holy virginal +womb, which bore him who was God and man, should later bear another mortal man. Thus, they +were his brothers or brethren in the sense of relatives, because they were related by blood to the +Blessed Virgin Mary. For it is the custom in Scripture to call relatives “brothers,” as in Genesis +(13:8): “Let us not quarrel, for we are brothers,” although Lot was the nephew of Abraham. And, +as Augustine says, just as in the tomb in which our Lord’s body had been placed no other body +was placed either before or after, so the womb of Mary conceived no other mortal person either +before or after Christ. Although some of the relatives of the Blessed Virgin were apostles, such +as the sons of Zebedee, and James of Alpheus, and some others, we should not think that these +were among those who were urging Christ; this was done by other relatives who did not love +him.</p> +<p>Secondly, we see their advice when they say: <span style="font-weight: bold">Leave this place, </span>that is, Galilee, <span style="font-weight: bold">and go to Judea, +</span>where you will find Jerusalem, a sacred place, well-suited to teachers. “Seer, go, flee to the land +of Ridah. There eat your bread and there prophesy” (Am 7:12).</p> +<p>1016 They give their reason when they say: <span style="font-weight: bold">so that your disciples also may see your works +which you perform. </span>Here they show, first, that they are hungry for an empty glory; secondly, +that they are suspicious; and thirdly, do not believe [in our Lord] .</p> +<p>They show that they are hungry for ail empty glory when they say, <span style="font-weight: bold">so that Your disciples also +may see your works which you perform. </span>For they allowed something human to Christ and +wanted to share the glory of the human honor that the people would show him. And so, they +urged him to perform his works in public: for it is a characteristic of one who is seeking human +glory to want publicly known whatever of his own or of his associates can bring glory. “They like +to pray at street comers, so people can see them” (Mt 6:5). We read of such people: “For they +loved the glory of men, more than the glory of God” (below 12:43).</p> +<p>They reveal that they themselves are suspicious, and first of all remark on Christ’s fear, saying: +<span style="font-weight: bold">Surely, no one works in secret. </span>As if to say: You say that you are performing miracles. But you +are doing them secretly because of fear; otherwise you would go to Jerusalem and do them before +the people. Nevertheless, our Lord says below: “I have said nothing secretly” (below 18:20).</p> +<p>Secondly, they refer to his love of glory, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">if he wants to be publicly renowned. </span>As if to +say: You want glory because of what you are doing, yet you are hiding because you are afraid. +Now this attitude is characteristic of those who are evil: to think that other people are +experiencing the same emotions as they are. Notice the disrespect with which the prudence of +the flesh reproached the Word made flesh. Job says against them: “You reproach him who is not +like you, and say what you should not” (Jb 4:3).</p> +<p>They show they do not believe when they say: <span style="font-weight: bold">If you do these things, reveal yourself to the +world, </span>doubting whether he did perform miracles. “He who does not believe is unfaithful” (Is +21:2).</p> +<p>1017 The Evangelist tells why they said this when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">For not even his brethren believed +in him. </span>For sometimes blood relatives are very hostile to one of their own, and are jealous of his +spiritual goods. They may even despise him. Thus Augustine says: “They could have Christ as +a relative, but in that very closeness they refused to believe in him.” “A man’s enemies are in his +own house” (Mi 7:6); “He has put my brethren far from me, and my acquaintances, like strangers, +have gone from me. My relatives have left me, and those who knew me have forgotten me” (Jb +19:13).</p> +<p>1018 Then (v 6), Christ’s answer is given. First, he mentions that the time was not appropriate +for going to Jerusalem; secondly, the reason for this (v 7); and thirdly, we see Christ deciding not +to go (v 8).</p> +<p>1019 We should note that all of the following text is explained differently by Augustine and by +Chrysostom. Augustine says that the brethren of our Lord were urging him to a human glory. +Now there is a time, in the future, when the saints do acquire glory, a glory they obtain by their +Sufferings and troubles. “He has tested thein like gold in a furnace, and he accepted them as the +victim of a holocaust. At the time of their visitation they will shine” (Wis 3:6). And there is a +time, the present, when the worldly acquire their glory. “Let not the flowers of the time pass us +by; let us crown ourselves with roses before they wither” (Wis 2:7). Our Lord, therefore, wanted +to show hat he was not looking for the glory of this present time, but that he wanted to attain to +the height of heavenly glory through his passion and humiliation. “It was necessary for Christ to +suffer, and so enter into his glory” (Lk 24:26). So Jesus says to them, i.e., his brethren: My time, +i.e., the time of my glory, <span style="font-weight: bold">has not yet come, </span>because my sorrow must be turned into joy: “The +sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, which will +be revealed in us” (Rom 8:18); <span style="font-weight: bold">but your time, </span>i.e., the time of the glory of this world, <span style="font-weight: bold">is always +here.</span></p> +<p>1020 He gives the reason why these times are different when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The world cannot hate +you, but me, it hates. </span>The reason why the time for the glory of the worldly is here is that they +love the same things the world loves, and they agree with the world. But the time for the glory +of the saints, who are looking for a spiritual glory, is not here, because they want what is +displeasing to the world, that is, poverty, afflictions, doing without food, and things like that. +They even disparage what the world loves; in fact, they despise the world: “The world has been +crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal 6:14). And so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The world cannot hate you. </span>As +if to say: Thus, the time of your glory is here, because the world does not hate you, who are in +agreement with it; and every animal loves its like. <span style="font-weight: bold">But me, it hates, </span>and so my time is not always +here. And the reason it hates me is <span style="font-weight: bold">because I bear witness against it, </span>that is, the world, <span style="font-weight: bold">for its +works are evil; </span>that is, I do not hesitate to reprimand those who are worldly, even though I know +that they will hate me for it and threaten me with death. “They,” that is, those who love evil, +“hate the one who rebukes at the city gate” (Am 5:10); “Do lot rebuke one who mocks, lest he +hate you” (Prv 9:8).</p> +<p>1021 But cannot a person of the world be hated by the world, .e., by another person of the world? +I answer that, in a particular case, one worldly person can hate another insofar as the latter has +what the first wants, or prevents him from obtaining what relates to the glory of this world. But +precisely insofar as a person is of the world, the world does not hate him. The saints, however, +are universally hated by the world because they are opposed to it. And if anyone of the world +does love them, it is not because he is of the world, but because of something spiritual in him.</p> +<p>1022 Our Lord refuses to go when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">You yourselves go up for this feast. I, however, +will not go up for this festival. </span>For just<span style="font-weight: bold"> </span>as there are two kinds of glory, so there are two different +feasts. Worldly people have temporal feasts, that is, their own enjoyments and banquets and such +exterior pleasures. “The Lord called for weeping and mourning ... and look at the rejoicing and +gladness” (Is 22:12); “I hate your feasts” (Is 1:14). But the saints have their own spiritual feasts, +which consist in the joys of the spirit: “Look upon Zion, the city of your feasts” (Is 33:20). So +he says: You yourselves, who are looking for the glory of this world, <span style="font-weight: bold">go up for this feast, </span>i.e., +to the feasts of temporal pleasure; <span style="font-weight: bold">I, however, will not go up for this festival, </span>for I will go to +the feast of an eternal celebration. I am not going up now <span style="font-weight: bold">because my time, </span>that is, the time of +my true glory, which will be a joy that lasts forever, an eternity without fatigue, and a brightness +without shadow, <span style="font-weight: bold">is not yet completed.</span></p> +<p>1023 Chrysostom keeps the same division of the text, but explains it this way. He says that these +brethren of our Lord joined with the Jews in plotting the death of Christ. And so they urged +Christ to go to the feast, intending to betray him and hand him over to the Jews. That is why he +says: <span style="font-weight: bold">My time, </span>that is, the time for my cross and death, <span style="font-weight: bold">has not yet come, </span>to go to Judea and be +killed. <span style="font-weight: bold">But your time is always here, </span>because you can associate with them without danger. And +this is because they cannot hate you: you who love and envy the same things they do. <span style="font-weight: bold">But me, +it hates, because I bear witness against it, for its works are evil. </span>This shows that the Jews hate +me, not because I broke the sabbath, but because I denounced them in public. <span style="font-weight: bold">You yourselves +go up for this feast, </span>that is, for its beginning (for it lasted seven days, as was said), <span style="font-weight: bold">I, however, +will not go up for this festival, </span>that is, with you,and when it first begins: <span style="font-weight: bold">because my time is +not yet completed, </span>when I am to suffer, for he was to be crucified at a future Passover. +Accordingly, he did not go with them then in order to remain out of sight, and so forth.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 2</span></p> +<BLOCKQUOTE><p>9 When he had said this, he remained in Galilee. 10 However, after his brethren had gone up, he +himself went up for the feast, not publicly, but as it were in secret. 11 The Jews looked for him +at the feast, and they asked: “Where is he?” 12 There was much whispering among the people +concerning him, for some were saying that he was a good man, while others said, “On the +contrary, he leads people astray.” 13 Nevertheless, no one spoke openly about him for fear of the +Jews. 14 Now when the festival was half over, Jesus went into the temple, and he taught. 15 The +Jews were amazed, saying, “How did this man get his learning, since he never studied?” 16 Jesus +answered and said: +<dd>“My doctrine is not mine, but his who sent me. +<dd>17 If anyone wants to do his will, he will know +<dd>whether this doctrine is from God, +<dd>or whether I am speaking on my own. +<dd>18 Whoever speaks on his own [authority] seeks his own glory. +<dd>But the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him +<dd>is truthful, and there is no injustice in him. +<dd>19 Did not Moses give you the law? +<dd>And yet none of you obey the law. +<dd>20 Why do you want to kill me?” +<BR>The crowd replied and said: “You have a demon within you! Who wants to kill you?” 21 Jesus +answered and said to them: +<dd>“I performed one work, and you are all amazed. +<dd>22 Therefore, Moses gave you circumcision, +<dd>(not that it originated with Moses, but with the patriarchs) +<dd>and you circumcise on the sabbath day. +<dd>23 If a man receives circumcision on the sabbath day, +<dd>so that the law of Moses may not be broken, +<dd>why are you indignant with me because I healed +<dd>a whole man on the sabbath? +<DD>24 Judge not by the appearances, but with a just judgment.”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> +<p>1024 After the Evangelist mentioned how our Lord’s relatives urged him to go to Judea, and +what Christ replied to them, he then tells us of his journey. First, of his delay in going into Judea; +secondly, of the order of the events; and thirdly, the way Christ went up.</p> +<p>1025 He mentions our Lord’s delay in going when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">When he had said this, </span>in answer +to his relatives, <span style="font-weight: bold">he remained in Galilee, </span>and did not go to the feast with them. He did this to +keep to his word: “I, however, will not go up for this festival.” As we read in Numbers (23:19): +“God is not like man, a liar.”</p> +<p>1026 He gives the order of events when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">However, after his brethren, </span>that is, his +relatives, <span style="font-weight: bold">had gone up, he himself went up for the feast. </span>This seerns to conflict with what he +had said before: “I will not go up”, for the Apostle says, “Jesus Christ, whom we preached among +you ... was not ‘Yes’ and ‘No,’ but only ‘Yes.’” (2 Cor 1:19).</p> +<p>I answer, first, that the festival of Tabernacles lasted for seven days, as was mentioned. Now our +Lord first stated, “I, however, will not go up for this festival,” that is, for its beginning. When it +says here that <span style="font-weight: bold">he himself went up for the feast</span>, we should understand this to refer to the middle +of the feast. This is why we read a little further on: “Now, when the festival was half over” (v +14). So it is clear that Christ was not breaking his word. Secondly, as Augustine says, his +relatives wanted him to go to Jerusalem to try for a temporal glory. So he said to them: “I, +however, will not go up for this festival,” for the purpose you want me to. But he did go to the +festival to teach the people and to tell them about an eternal glory. Thirdly, as Chrysostom says, +our: Lord said, “I, however, will not go up for this festival,” to suffer and die, as they wished; but +he did go, not in order to suffer, but to teach others.</p> +<p>1027 The way he went was not <span style="font-weight: bold">publicly, but as it were in secret.</span> There are three reasons for +this. The first, given by Chrys ostom, is so that he would not call more attention to his divinity, +and so perhaps make his incarnation less certain, as was said above; and so that those who are +virtuous would not be ashamed to hid from those who are persecuting them when they cannot +openly restrain them. Thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">in secret,</span> to show that this was done according to plan: +“Truly, you are a hidden God” (Is 45:15). Augustine gives us another reason: to teach us that +Christ was hidden in the figures of the Old Testament: “I will wait for the Lord, who has hidden +his fact (i.e., clear knowledge) from the house of Jacob” (Is 8:17); so, “Even to this day ... a veil +is over their hearts” (2 Cor 3:15). Thus everything that was said to this ancient people was a +shadow of the good things to come, as we see from Hebrews (10:1). So our Lord went up in +secret to show that even this feast was a figure. <i>Scenopegia</i>, as we saw, was the feast of +Tabernacles; and the<i> </i>one who celebrates this feast is the one who understands that he is a pilgrim +in this world. Another reason why our Lord went up in secret was to teach us that we should +conceal the good things we do, not looking for human approval or desiring the applause of the +crowd: “Take care not to perform your good actions in the sight of men, in order to be seen by +them” (Mt 6:1).</p> +<p>1028 Then (v 11), he mentions the opportunity Christ had to show the origin of his spiritual +teaching. He mentions two such opportunities: one was due to the disagreement among the +people; the other to their amazement (v 15). The people disagreed in what they thought of Christ. +He does three things concerning this. First, he shows what they had in common; secondly, how +they differed (v 12); and thirdly, whose opinion prevailed (v 13).</p> +<p>1029 What they had in common was that they <span style="font-weight: bold">looked for him at the feast, and they asked: +Where is he? </span>It is obvious that they did not even want to mention his name because of their +hatred and hostility: “They hated him and could not speak civilly to him” (Gn 37:4).</p> +<p>1030 They differed, however, because some looked for him because they wished to learn: “Seek +him, and your soul will live” (Ps 68:33); others were looking for him in order to harm him: as +in the Psalm (39:15): “They seek my soul to carry it away.” <span style="font-weight: bold">And so There was much +whispering among the people concerning him, </span>because of their disagreements. And although +“whispering” (<i>murmur</i>) is neuter in gender, Jerome makes it masculine (<i>murmur multus</i>) because +he was following the custom of the older grammarians, or else to show that divine Scripture is +not subject to the rules of Priscian.</p> +<p>There was disagreement: for some of the people, that is, those who were right in heart, were +saying, of Christ, <span style="font-weight: bold">that he was a good man. </span>“How good God is to Israel, to those whose heart is +right” (Ps 72:1); “The Lord is good to those who hope in him, to the one who seeks him” (Lam +3:25). <span style="font-weight: bold">While others, </span>that is, those who were badly disposed, said: On the contrary, i.e., he is not +a good man. We can see from this that it was the people who thought that he was a good person, +while he was considered evil by the chief priests; so they say, he leads people astray: “We found +this man leading our people astray” (Lk 23:2); “We have remembered that that seducer said ...” +(Mt 27:63).</p> +<p>1031 Here we should note that to seduce is to lead away. Now a person can be led away either +from what is true or from what is false. And in either way a person can be called a seducer: either +because he leads one away from the truth, and in this sense it does not apply to Christ, because +he is the truth (below c 8); or because he leads one away from what is false, and in this sense +Clirist is called a seducer: “You seduced me, O Lord, and I was seduced. You were stronger than +I, and you have won” (Jer 20:7). Would that all of us were called and were seducers in this sense, +as Augustine says. But we call a person a seducer primarily because he leads others away from +the truth and deceives them: because a person is said to be led away if he is drawn from the +common way. But the common way is the way of truth; heresies, on the other hind, and the way +of the wicked, are detours.</p> +<p>1032 It was the opinion of the evil, that is, of the chief priests, that finally won out. Thus he +continues, <span style="font-weight: bold">Nevertheless, no one spoke openly about him.</span> This was because the people were +held back by their fear of the chief priests, for as stated below (9:22): “If any one should profess +him to be the Christ, he would be put out of the synagogue.” This reveals the wickedness with +which the leaders plotted against Christ; and it shows that those who were subject to them, i.e., +the people, were not free to say what they thought.</p> +<p>1033 Next (v 15), we see the second opportunity Christ had to present his teaching, that is, the +amazement of the people. First, we see the object of their amazement; secondly, their amazement +itself, and thirdly, the reason why they were amazed.</p> +<p>1034 The object of their amazement is the doctrine or teaching of Christ. Both the time and the +place of this teaching are given. The time is mentioned when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Now when the festival +was half over, </span>that is, when as many days were left of the feast as had passed. Thus, since the +feast lasted some seven days, this took place on the fourth day. As we said, when Christ hid +himself, it was a sign of his humanity, and an example of virtue for us. But when he did come +before them, and they could not suppress him, this showed his divinity. Further, our Lord went +when the feast was half over, because at the beginning everyone would be occupied with matters +relating to the feast: the good, with the worship of God, and others with trivialities and financial +profit; but when it was half over, and such matters had been settled, the people would be better +prepared to receive his teaching. Thus our Lord did not go to the first several days of the feast +so that he would find them more attentive and better prepared for his teaching. Similarly, Christ’s +going to the feast at this time paralled the arrangement of his teaching: for Christ came to teach +us about the kingdom of God, not at the beginning of the world, nor at its ending, but during the +intervening time. “You will make it known in the intervening years” (Hb 3:2).</p> +<p>The place where our Lord taught is mentioned when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">into the temple. </span>He taught there +for two reasons. First, to show that he was teaching the truth, which they could not depricate, and +which was necessary for all: “I have said nothing secretly” (below 18:20). Secondly, because the +temple, since it was a sacred place, was appropriate for the very holy teaching of Christ: “Come! +Let us go up the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob. And he will teach +us his ways, and we will walk in his steps,” as we read in Isaiah (2:3).</p> +<p>The Evangelist does not mention what Christ taught, for, as was said, the Evangelists do not +report everything our Lord did and said, but those which excited the people or produced some +controversy. And so here he mentions the excitement his teaching produced in the people: that +is, that those who had said before, “He leads people astray,” were now amazed at his teaching.</p> +<p>1035 He mentions this amazement when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Jews were amazed. </span>And this is not +surprising, for “Your testimony is wonderful” (Ps 118:129). For the words of Christ are the +words of divine wisdom.</p> +<p>He adds the reason why they were amazed when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">How did this man get his learning, +since he never studied? </span>For they knew that Jesus was the son of a poor woman and he was +considered the son of a carpenter; as such, he would be working for a living and devoting his +time, not to study, but to physical work, according to “I am poor, and have labored since my +youth” (Ps 87:16). And so when they hear him teach and debate, they are amazed, and say, <span style="font-weight: bold">How +did this man get his learning, since he never studied? </span>Much the same is said in Matthew +(13:54): “Where did he acquire this widsom, and these great works? Isn’t he the son of the +carpenter?”</p> +<p>1036 Having been told of the place and opportunity which Christ had to reveal the origin of his +spiritual teaching, we now see the origin of this teaching. First, he shows them that God is the +source of this spiritual teaching; secondly, he invites them to accept it (v 37). As to the first, he +does two things. First, he shows the origin of this teaching; secondly, the origin of the one +teaching it (v 25). He does two things about the first. First, he shows the origin of this teaching; +secondly, he answers an objection (v 19). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he shows +the origin of this teaching; secondly, he proves th t it comes from God (v 17).</p> +<p>1037 He says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus answered and said. </span>As if to say: You are wondering where I gained my +knowledge; but <span style="font-weight: bold">I say, My doctrine is not mine. </span>If he had said: “The doctrine that I am +presenting to you is not mine,” there would be no problem. But he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">My doctrine is not +mine; </span>and this seems to be a contradiction. However, this can he explained, for this statement +can be understood is several ways. Our Lord’s doctrine can in some sense be called his own, and +in some sense not his own. First, we can understand Christ as the Son of God. Then, since the +doctrine of anyone is nothing else than his word, and the Son of God is the Word of God, it +follows that the doctrine of the Father is the Son himself. But this same Word belongs to himself +through an identity of substance. “What does belong to you, if not you yourself?” However, he +does not belong to himself through his origin. As Augustine says: “If you do not belong to +yourself (because you are from another), what does?” This seems to be the meaning, expressed +in summary fashion, of: <span style="font-weight: bold">My doctrine is not mine. </span>As if to say: I am not of myself’. This refutes +the Sabellian heresy, which dared to say that the Son is the Father.</p> +<p>Or, we could understand it as meaning that <span style="font-weight: bold">My doctrine, </span>which I proclaim with created words, +<span style="font-weight: bold">is not mine, but his who sent me, </span>i.e., it is the Father’s; that is, my doctrine is not mine as from +myself, but it is from the Father: because the Son has even his knowledge from the Father +through an eternal generation. “All things have been given to me by my Father” (Mt 11:27).</p> +<p>Secondly, we can understand Christ as the Son of Man. Then he is saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">My doctrine, </span>which +I have in my created soul, and which my lips proclaim, <span style="font-weight: bold">is not mine, </span>i.e, it is not mine as from +myself, but from God: because every truth, by whomever spoken, is from the Holy Spirit.</p> +<p>Thus, as Augustine says in <i>The Trinity </i>(Bk 1), our Lord called this doctrine his own from one +point of view, and not his own from another point of view. According to his form of God, it was +his own; but according to his form of a servant, it was not his own. This is an example for us, that +we should realize that all our knowledge is from God, and thank him for it: “What do you have +which you have not been given? And if you have been given it, why do you glory as if you have +not been given it?” (1 Cor 4:7).</p> +<p>1038 Then (v 17), he proves that his doctrine is from God. And he does this in two ways: first, +from the judgment of those who correctly understand such matters; and secondly, from his own +intention (v 18).</p> +<p>1039 With respect to the first, we should note that when there is a question whether someone is +performing well in some art, this is decided by one who has experience in that art; just as the +question whether someone is speaking French well should be decided by one who is well versed +in the French language. With this in mind, our Lord is saying: The question whether my doctrine +is from God must be decided by one who has experience in divine matters, for such a person can +judge correctly about these things. “The sensual man does not perceive those things that pertain +to the Spirit of God. The spiritual man judges all things” (1 Cor 2:14). Accordingly, he is saying: +Because you are alienated from God, you do not know whether a doctrine is from God. If anyone +wants to do his. will, that is, the will of God, he can know whether this doctrine is from God, <span style="font-weight: bold">or +whether I am speaking on my own </span>(a <i>meipso). </i>Indeed, one who is speaking what is false is +speaking on his own, because “When he lies, he speaks on his own,” as we read below (8:44).</p> +<p>Chrysostom explains this text in another way. The will of God is our peace, our love, and our +humility; thus Matthew (5:9) says: “Happy are the peacemakers, because they will be called sons +of God. But the love of controversy often distorts a person’s mind to such an extent that he +thinks that what is really true is false. Thus, when we abandon the spirit of controversy, we +possess more surely the certitude of truth. “Answer, I entreat you, without contention, and judge, +speaking what is just” (Jb 6:29). So our Lord is saying: If anyone wishes to judge my doctrine +correctly, let him do the will of God, i.e., abandon the anger, the envy and the hatred which he +has for me without reason. Then, nothing will prevent him from knowing <span style="font-weight: bold">whether this doctrine +is from God, or whether I am speaking on my own, </span>i.e., whether I am speaking the words of +God.</p> +<p>Augustine explains it this way. It is the will of God that we know his works, just as it is the will +of a head of a household that his servants do his works. The work of God is that we believe in +him whom he has sent: “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he sent” (above +6:29). Thus he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">If anyone wants to do his will, </span>that is, God’s will, which is to believe in +me, <span style="font-weight: bold">he will know whether this doctrine is from God: </span>“If you do not believe, you will not +understand,” as that other version of Isaiah (7:9) says.</p> +<p>1040 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever speaks on his own seeks his own glory, </span>he proves the same +thing from his intention. And he presents two intentions through which we can recognize the two +sources of a doctrine. Some are said to speak on their own [<i>a se</i>], and others not on their own. +Now whoever strives to speak the truth does not speak on his own. All our knowledge of the +truth is from another: either from instruction, as from a teacher; or from revelation, as from God; +or by a process of discovery, as from things themselves, for “the invisible things of God are +clearly known by the things that have been made” (Rom 1:20). Consequently, in whatever way +a person acquires his knowledge, he does not acquire it on his own. That person speaks on his +own who takes what he says neither from things themselves, nor from any human teaching, but +from his own heart: “They proclaim a vision taken out of their own hearts” (Jer 23:16); “Woe +to those foolish prophets who prophesy out of their own hearts” (Ez 13:3). Accordingy, when a +person devises a doctrine on his own he does it for the sake of human glory: for, as we see from<span style="font-weight: bold"> +</span>Chrysostom, a person who wishes to present his own private doctrine does so for no other +purpose than to acquire glory. And this is what our Lord says, proving that his doctrine is from +God: <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever speaks on his own, </span>about a certain knowledge of the truth, which is really from +another, <span style="font-weight: bold">seeks his own glory. </span>It is for this reason, and because of pride, that various heresies and +false opinions have arisen. And this is a characteristic of the antichrist “who opposes and is +exalted above all that is called God, or is worshipped” (2 Thes 2:4).</p> +<p><span style="font-weight: bold">But the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him, </span>as I do—“I do not seek my own glory” +(below 8:50)—<span style="font-weight: bold">is truthful, and there is no injustice in him. </span>I am truthful because my doctrine +contains the truth; there is no injustice in me because I do not appropriate the glory of another. +As Augustine says: “He gave us a magnificent example of humility when, in the form of a man, +he sought the glory of the Father, and not his own. O man, you should do the same! When you +do something good, you seek your glory; when you do something evil, you insult God.” It is +obvious that he was not looking for his own glory, because if he had not been an enemy of the +chief priests, he would not have been persecuted by them. So Christ, and everyone who is looking +for the glory of God, has knowledge in his intellect, “Master, we know that you are truthful” (Mt +22:16): thus he says, he <span style="font-weight: bold">is truthful. </span>And he has the correct intention in his will: thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and +there is no injustice in him. </span>For a person is unjust when he takes for himself what belongs to +another; but glory is proper to God alone; therefore, he who seeks glory for himself is unjust.</p> +<p>1041 Then (v 19), he answers an objection. For someone could tell Christ that his doctrine was +not from God because he broke the sabbath, according to, “This man is not from God, for he does +not keep the sabbath” (below 9:16). This is what he intends to answer; and he does three things. +First, he clears himself, by arguing from the actions of those who are accusing him; secondly, we +see their vicious reply (v 20); and thirdly, he vindicates himself with a reasonable explanation +(v 21).</p> +<p>1042 He says: Even granting, as you say, that my doctrine is not from God because I do not keep +the law, breaking the sabbath, nevertheless, you do not have any reason to accuse me since you +do the same thing. Thus he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Did not Moses give you the law? </span>i.e., did he not give it to your +people? <span style="font-weight: bold">And yet none of you obey the law. </span>“You received the law through the angels, and have +not kept it” (Acts 7:53). This is why Peter says: “A yoke, which neither our fathers nor we were +able to bear” (Acts 15:10). Therefore, if you do not keep the law, why do you want to kill me for +not keeping it? You are not doing this because of the law, but out of hatred. If you were acting +out of devotion for the law, you would keep it yourselves. “Let us lie in wait for the just man, +because he is unfavorable to us, and against our works, and he reproaches us for breaking the +law” (Wis 2:12); and a little further on we read: “ Let us condemn him to a most shameful death” +(Wis 2:20).</p> +<p>Or, it could be explained this way: You do not keep the law that Moses gave you; and this is +obvious from the fact that you want to kill me, which is against the law: “You shall not kill” (Ex +20:13). Another explanation, following Augustine, is: You do not keep the law because I myself +am included in the law: “If you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me as well, for it was +about me that he wrote” (above 5:46). But you want to kill me.</p> +<p>1043 Then we see the vicious reply of the crowd, when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The crowd replied and said: +You have a demon within you! </span>As Augustine says, their reply indicates disorder and confusion, +rather than any order: for they are saying that the one who casts out devils has one himself (Mt +c 12).</p> +<p>1044 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">I performed one work, and you are all amazed, </span>our Lord, at peace +in his own truth, answers them, and justifies himself with a reasonable explanation. First, he +recalls the incident that is troubling them; secondly, he shows that this should not bother them +(v 22); and thirdly, he shows the way to a judgment that is just (v 24).</p> +<p>1045 Jesus answered them: <span style="font-weight: bold">I performed one work, and you are all amazed. </span>He does not trade +one insult for another, nor rebuff it, because “When he was derided, he did not deride in return” +(1 Pt 2:23). He rather recalls for them his cure of the paralytic, which was the cause of their +amazement. But their amazement was not one of devotion, as in “Your heart will be amazed and +expanded” (Is 60:5), but a kind of agitation and disturbance, as in “Those who see it will be +afflicted with terrible fear, and will be amazed” (Wis 5:2). So, if you are amazed over one of my +works, i.e., if you are disturbed and troubled, what would you do if you saw all of my works? +For, as Augustine says, his works were those which they saw in the world: even all the sick are +healed by him. “He sent his word, and healed them” (Ps 106:20); “It was neither a herb nor a +poultice that healed them, but your word, O Lord, which heals all” (Wis 16:12). Thus, the reason +why you are disturbed is that you have seen only one of my works, and not all of them.</p> +<p>1046 Then (v 22), he shows that there is no reason why they should be disturbed. First, he recalls +the command given to them by Moses; secondly, he states their customary behavior; and thirdly, +he presents an argument based on the first two.</p> +<p>1047 The command of Moses was about circumcision; so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Therefore, </span>i.e., to signify my +works, <span style="font-weight: bold">Moses gave you circumcision. </span>For circumcision was given as a sign, as we read, “it will +be a sign of the covenant between me and you” (Gn 17:11). For it signified Christ. This is the +reason why it was always done on the genital organ, because Christ was to descend, in his human +nature, from Abraham; and Christ is the one who spiritually circumcises us, i.e., both in mind and +body. Or, it was done to the genital organ because it was given in opposition to original sin.</p> +<p>We do not find it explicitly stated that Moses gave circumcision, unless in Exodus (12:44): +“Every slave who is bought shall be circumcised.” And although Moses did tell them to +circumcise, he was not the one who established this practice, because he was not the first one to +receive the command to circumcise; this was Abraham, as we see from Genesis ( 17:10).</p> +<p>1048 Now it was the custom among the Jews to circumcise on the sabbath. And this is what he +says: <span style="font-weight: bold">you circumcise on the sabbath day. </span>They did this because Abraham was told that a boy +should be circumcised on the eighth day: “He circumcised him on the eighth day, as God had +commanded him” (Gn 2 1:4). On the other hand, they were told by Moses not to do any work on +the sabbath. But it sometimes happened that the eighth day was a sabbath. And so, in +circumcising a boy on that day, they were breaking a command of Moses for a command of the +patriarchs.</p> +<p>1049 Our Lord is arguing from those facts when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">If a man receives circumcision on the +sabbath day, so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you indignant with me +because I healed a whole man on the sabbath?</span></p> +<p>We should note here that three things make this argument effective: two of these are explicit, and +the other implied. First, although the command given to Abraham [about circumcision] was the +first to be given, it was not canceled by the command given to Moses concerning observing the +sabbath. “I say that the covenant, confirmed by God, is not canceled by the law, which came four +hundred and thirty years later” (Gal 3:17). And so Christ is arguing from this: Although when +dealing with human laws, the later ones cancel the earlier laws, in the case of divine laws, the +earlier ones have greater authority. And so the command given to Moses about observing the +sabbath does not cancel the command which was given to Abraham concerning circumcision. +Therefore, much less does it interfere with me, who am only doing what was decided by God +before the creation of the world, for the salvation of mankind; and this salvation was symbolized +by the sabbath.</p> +<p>Another point is that the Jews were commanded not to work on the sabbath; yet they did do +things that were related to the salvation of the individual. So Christ is saying: If you people, who +were commanded not to work on the sabbath, circumcise on that day (and this concerns the +salvation of the individual, and thus it was done to an individual organ) and you do this <span style="font-weight: bold">so that +the law of Moses may not be broken</span> (from which it is clear that those things that pertain to +salvation should not be omitted on the sabbath), it follows with greater reason that a man should +do on that day those things that pertain to the salvation of everyone. Therefore, you should not +be indignant with me <span style="font-weight: bold">because I healed a whole man on the sabbath.</span></p> +<p>The third point is that each command was a symbol: for “all these things happened to them in +symbol” (1 Cor 10:11). Thus, if one symbol, i.e., the command to observe the sabbath, does not +cancel the other symbol, i.e., the command to circumcise, much less does it cancel the truth. For +circumcision sybolized our Lord, as Augustine says.</p> +<p>Finally, he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">a whole man, </span>because, since God’s works are perfect, the man was cured so as +to be healthy in body, and he believed so as to be healthy in soul.</p> +<p>1050 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Judge not by the appearances, but with a just judgment, </span>he guides +them to a fair consideration of himself’, so that they do not judge him according to appearances, +but give a judgment which is just. There are two ways in which one is said to judge according +to appearances. First, a judge may reach his decision relying on the allegations: “Men see the +things that are evident” (1 Kgs 15:7). But this way can lead to error; thus he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Judge not by +the appearances, </span>i.e., by what is immediately evident, but examine the matter diligently: “I +diligently investigated the stranger’s cause” (Jb 29:16); “He will not judge by appearances” (Is +1 1:3). In the second way, <span style="font-weight: bold">Judge not by the appearances, </span>i.e., do not show partiality or +favoritism in your judgment: for all judges are forbidden to do this. “You will not show +favoritism when judging a person who is poor” (Ex 23:6); “You have shown partiality in your +judgment” (Mal 2:9). To show partiality in a judgment is not to give a judgment that is just +because of love, or deference, or fear, or the status of a person, which things have nothing to do +with the case. So he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Judge not by the appearances, but with a just judgment, </span>as if to +say: Just because Moses is more honored among you than I am, you should not base your +decision on our reputations, but on the nature of the facts: because the things I am doing are +greater than what Moses did.</p> +<p>But it should be noted, according to Augustine, that one who loves all equally does not judge +with partiality. For when we honor men differently according to their rank, we must beware of +showing partiality.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 3</span></p> +<BLOCKQUOTE><p>25 Some of the inhabitants of Jerusalem then said: “Is he not the man they want to kill? 26 Look, +he is speaking publicly, and they say nothing to him! Could it be that the rulers feally know that +he is the Christ? 27 We know where this man comes from; but when the Christ comes, no one +will know where he comes from.” 28 So as Jesus was teaching in the temple, he cried out and +said: +<dd>“You do indeed know me, +<dd>and you know where I come from. +<dd>And I have not come of my own accord. +<dd>But the one who sent me is truthful, +<dd>whom you do not know. +<dd>29 I know him. +<dd>And if I were to say that I do not know him, +<dd>I would be like you, a liar. +<dd>But I do know him, because I am from him, +<dd>and he sent me.” +<br>30 They therefore wanted to seize him, but no one laid a hand on him, because his hour had not +yet come. 31 Many of the people, however, believed in him, and they said: “When the Christ +comes, will he work more wonders than this man has done?” 32 The Pharisees heard the people +saying these things about him, so the rulers and Pharisees sent officers to apprehend Jesus.</p></BLOCKQUOTE> +<p>1051 Having considered the origin of his doctrine, he now tells us about the origin of its teacher. +First, Christ shows his source, from which he comes secondly, he shows his end, to which he +goes (v 33). He does three things concerning the first. First, we see the doubt of the people about +his origin; secondly, we have Christ’s teaching concerning his origin (v 28); and thirdly, we see +the effect this teaching had (v 30). He does two things about the first. First, we see the +amazement of the people; secondly, their conjecture (v 26). The people were amazed over two +things: at the unjust statements of their leaders, and at the public teaching of Christ (v 25).</p> +<p>1052 As we said before, Christ went up to this feast in secret to show the weakness of his human +nature; but he publicly taught in the temple, with his enemies being unable to restrain him, to +show his divinity. And so, as Augustine remarks, what was thought to be a lack of courage turned +out to be strength. Accordingly, <span style="font-weight: bold">Some of the inhabitants of Jersusalem then said, </span>in +amazement, for they knew how fiercely their leaders were looking for him, as they lived with +them in Jerusalem. Thus Chrysostom says: “The most pitiable of all were they who saw a very +clear sign of his divinity and, leaving everything to the judgment of their corrupt leaders, failed +to show Christ reverence.” “As the ruler of a city is, so are its inhabitants” (Sir 10:2). Yet they +were amazed at the power he had which kept him from being apprehended. So they said: <span style="font-weight: bold">Is he +not the man they, </span>i.e., their leaders, want. This agrees with what was said before: “For reasons +like this the Jews began to persecute Jesus, because he performed such works on the sabbath” +(above 5:16); “Evil has come out of the elders of the people, who ruled them” (Dn 13:5). This +also shows that Christ spoke the truth, while what their leaders said was false. For above, when +our Lord asked them: “Why do you want to kill me?” they denied it and said: “You have a demon +within you! Who wants to kill you?” But here, what their leaders had denied, these others admit +when they say, <span style="font-weight: bold">Is he not the man they want to kill? </span>Accordingly, they are amazed, considering +the evil intentions of their leaders.</p> +<p>1053 Again, they were amazed that Christ was openly teaching; so they said: <span style="font-weight: bold">Look, he is +speaking publicly, </span>i.e., Christ was teaching, an indication of the secure possession of the truth, +“I have spoken publicly” (below 18:20), <span style="font-weight: bold">and they say nothing to him, </span>held back by divine +power. For it is a characteristic of God’s power that he prevents the hearts of evil men from +carrying out their evil plans. “When 1he Lord is pleased with the way a man is living he will +make his vneinies be at peace with him” (Ps 16:7); and again, “The heart of the king is in the +hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever he wills” (Prv 21:1).</p> +<p>1054 We see their conjecture when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">Could it be that the rulers really know that he is +the Christ? </span>As if to say: Before, they sought to kill him; but now that they have found him, they +do not say anything to him. Still, the leaders had not changed their opinion about Christ: “If they +had known, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8), but were restrained +by divine power.</p> +<p>1055 Their objection to this conjecture is then added: We <span style="font-weight: bold">know where this man comes from. +</span>As if to argue: The Christ should have a hidden origin; but the origin of this man is known; +therefore, he is not the Christ. This shows their folly, for granted that some of their leaders +believed Christ, they did not follow their opinion, but offered another, which was false. “This is +Jerusalem; I have set her in the midst of the nations” (Ez 5:5). For they knew that Christ took his +origin from Mary, but they did not know the way this came about: “Isn’t Joseph his father, and +Mary his mother’?” as we read in Matthew ( 13:55).</p> +<p>1056 Why did they say, when the Christ comes, <span style="font-weight: bold">no one will know where he comes from, </span>since +it says in Micah (5:2): “Out of you [Bethlehem-Ephrathah] will come a leader, who will rule my +people Israel.”? I answer that they took this opinion from Isaiah, who said: “Who will make +known his origin?” (53:8). Thus, they knew from the prophets where he was from, according to +his human origin; and they also knew from them that they did not know it, according to his divine +origin.</p> +<p>1057 Then (v 28), he shows his origin. First, he shows in what sense his origin is known, and in +what sense it is not know; in the second place, he shows how we can acquire a knowledge of his +origin (v 29). He does two things about the first. First, he shows what they knew about his origin; +secondly, what they did not know about it (v 28b).</p> +<p>1058 They did know the origin of Jesus; and so he says of Jesus that <span style="font-weight: bold">he cried out</span>. Now a cry +comes from some great emotion. Sometimes it indicates the upheaval of a soul in interior +distress; and in this sense it does not apply to Christ: “He will not cry out” (Is 42:2); “The words +of the wise are heard in silence” (Ecc 9:17). Sometimes it implies great devotion, as in, “In my +trouble I cried to the Lord” (Ps 119:1). And sometimes, along with this, it signifies that what is +to be said is important, as in, “The Seraphim cried to each other and said: ‘Holy, holy, holy, is +the Lord God of hosts’ “ (Is 6:3); and in, “Does not wisdom cry out?” (Prv 8:1). This is the way +preachers are encouraged to cry out: “Cry out, do not stop!. Raise you voice like a trumpet” (Is +58:1). This is the way Christ cried out here, teaching in the temple.</p> +<p>And he said: <span style="font-weight: bold">You do indeed know me, </span>according to appearances, <span style="font-weight: bold">and you know where I come +from, </span>that is, as to my bodily existence: “After this he was seen on earth” (Bar 3:38). For they +knew that he was born from Mary in Bethlehem, and brought up in Nazareth; but they did not +know about the virgin birth, and that he had been conceived through the Holy Spirit, as +Augustine says. With the exception of the virgin birth, they knew everything about Jesus that +pertained to his humanity.</p> +<p>1059 They did not know his hidden origin; and so he says: And I have not come of my own +accord. First, he gives his origin; and secondly, he shows that it is hidden from them.</p> +<p>His origin is from the Father, from eternity. And so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">I have not come of my own accord, +</span>as if to say: Before I came into the world through my humanity, I existed according to my +divinity: “Before Abraham came to be, I am” (below 8:58). For he could not have come unless +he already was. And although I have come, <span style="font-weight: bold">I have not come of my own accord </span>[<i>a me ipso</i>], +because the Son is not of himself [<i>a se</i>], but from the Father. “I came from the Father and have +come into the world” (below 16:28). Indeed, his origin was foretold by the Father, who promised +to send him: “I beg you, O Lord, send him whom you are going to send” (Ex 4:13); “I will send +them a Savior and a defender, to free them” (Is 19:20). And so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">the one who sent me is +truthful, </span>as if to say: I have not come from another but from him who promised and kept his +promise, as he is truthful: “God is truthful” (Rom 3:4). Consequently, he teaches me to speak the +truth, because I have been sent by one who is truthful. But they do not know this, because they +do not know him who sent me; and so he says: whom you do not know.</p> +<p>1060 But since every man, although born in a bodily condition, is from God, it seems that Christ +could say that he is from God; and consequently, that they do know where he comes from. I +answer, according to Hilary, that the Son is a (from) God in a different way than others: for he +is from God in such a way that he is also God; and so God is his consubstantial principle. But +others are <i>a</i> (from) God, but in such a way that they are not <i>ex </i>(from) him. Thus, it is not known +where the Son is from because the nature <i>ex </i>(from) which he is, is not known. But where men +are from is not unknown: for if something exists <i>ex </i>(from) nothing, where it is from cannot be +unknown.</p> +<p>1061 Then when he says, I know him, he teaches us how to know him from whom he is. For if +a thing is to be learned, it must be learned from one who knows it. But only the Son knows the +Father. And so he says: If you wish to know him who sent me, you must acquire this knowledge +from me, because <span style="font-weight: bold">I</span> alone <span style="font-weight: bold">know him. </span>First, he shows that he knows him; secondly, he shows the +perfection of his knowledge; and thirdly, the nature of his knowledge.</p> +<p>1062 He shows that he knows him when he says, I know him. Now it is true that “All men see +him” Qb 36:25), but they do not we him in the same way, for in this life we see him through the +intermediary of creatures: “The invisible things of God are clearly known through the things that +have been made” (Rom 1:20). Thus we read: “Now we see in a mirror, in an obscure manner” +(1 Cor 13:12). But the angels and the blessed in heaven see him through his essence:—“Their +angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 18:10): “We shall see +him as he is” (1 Jn 3:2). The Son of God, on the other hand, sees him in a more excellent way +than all, that is, with a comprehensive or all-inclusive vision: “No one has ever seen God,” i.e., +in a comprehensive way; “it is the Only Begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, who +has made him known” (above 1:18); “No one knows the Father but the Son” (Mt 11:27). It is of +this vision that he is speaking of here, when he says: I know him, with a comprehensive +knowledge.</p> +<p>1063 He shows the perfection of his knowledge when he says: And if I were to say that I do not +know <span style="font-weight: bold">him, I would be like you, a liar. </span>This is mentioned for two reasons. Intellectual creatures +do know God, though from a distance and imperfectly, for “All men see him, from a distance” +(Jb 36:25). For divine truth transcends all our knowledge: “God is greater than our hearts” (1 Jn +3:20). Therefore, whoever knows God can say without lying: “I do not know him,” because he +does not know him to the full extent that he is knowable. But the Son knows God the Father most +perfectly, just as he knows himself most perfectly. Thus he cannot say: I do not know him.</p> +<p>Again, because our knowledge of God, especially that which comes through grace, can be +lost—“They forgot God, who saved them” (Ps 105:21)—men can say, I do not know him, as long +as they are in this present life: because no one knows whether he deserves love or hatred. The +Son, on the other hand, has a knowledge of the Father that cannot be lost; so he cannot say: I do +not know him.</p> +<p>We should understand, I would be like you, as a reverse likeness. For they would not be lying if +they said they did not know God; but they would be if they said that they did know him, since +they did not know him. But if Christ said that he did not know him, he would be lying, since he +did know him. So the meaning of this statement is this: If I were to say that I do not know him, +then since I really do know him, I would be like you, a liar, who say that you know him, although +you do not.</p> +<p>1064 Could not Christ have said: I do not know him? It seems he could, since he could have +moved his lips and said the words. And so he could have lied. I reply that Christ did say this and +still was not lying. We should explain it this way: If he were to say, <span style="font-weight: bold">I do not know him, +</span>declaratively, meaning, “I believe in my heart what I profess by my lips,” [then he would have +been a liar]. Now to say as the truth what is false comes from two defects: from a defect of +knowledge in the intellect; and Christ could not have this since he is the wisdom of God (1 Cor +1:30); or it could come from a defect of right will in the affections; and this could not be in Christ +either since he is the power of God, according to the same text. Thus he could not say the words +<span style="font-weight: bold">I do not know him</span>, declaratively. Yet this entire conditional statement is not false, although both +its parts are impossible.</p> +<p>1065 The reason for this singular and perfect knowledge of Christ is given when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">I do +know him, because I am from him, and he sent </span>me. Now all knowledge comes about through +some likeness, since nothing is known except insofar as there is a likeness of the known in the +knower. But whatever proceeds from something has a likeness to that from which it proceeds; +and so, all who truly know have a varied knowledge of God according to the different degrees +of their procession from him. The rational soul has a knowledge of God insofar as it participates +in a likeness to him in a more imperfect way than other intellectual creatures. An angel, because +it has a more explicit likeness to God, being a stamp of resemblance, knows God more clearly. +But the Son has the most perfect likeness to the Father, since he has the same essence and power +as he does; and so he knows him most perfectly, as was said. And so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">But I do know +him, </span>that is, to the extent that he is knowable. And the reason for this is because I am from him, +having the same essence with him through consubstantiality. Thus, just as he knows himself +perfectly through his essence, so I do know him perfectly through the same essence. And so that +we do not understand these words as referring to his being sent into this world, he at once adds, +and he sent me. Consequently, the statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">I am from him, </span>refers to his eternal generation, +through which he is consubstantial with the Father. But then when he says, and he sent me, he +is saying that the Father is the author of the incarnation: “God sent his Son, made from a woman, +made under the law” (Gal 4:4). Now just as the Son has a perfect knowledge of the Father +because he is from the Father, so because the soul of Christ is united to the Word in a unique +way, it has a unique and more excellent knowledge of God than other creatures, although it does +not comprehend him. And so Christ can say, according to his human nature: I know him in a +more excellent way than other creatures do, but without comprehending him.</p> +<p>1066 Then (v 30), he considers the effect of his teaching. First (in the people; then on the +Pharisees (v 32). He does two things with the first. First, he shows the effect of this teaching on +those of the people who were ill-willed; secondly, on those who were favorable (v 31). He does +three things concerning the first. First, he mentions the evil intention of the people; secondly, that +they were hindered in carrying out their plan; and thirdly, he mentions the reason why they were +hindered.</p> +<p>1007 he presents their evil intention when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">They therefore wanted to seize him. +</span>Because our Lord said to them, “whom you do not know,” they became angry, feigning that they +did know him. And so they formed the evil plan of seizing him, so that they could crucify and +kill him: “Go after him, and seize him” (Ps 70:11). Yet there are some who have Christ within +themselves, and still seek to seize him in a reverent manner: “I will go up into the palm tree and +seize its fruit” (Sg 7:8). And so the Apostle says: “I will go after it to seize it” (Phil 3:12).</p> +<p>1068 He mentions that they were hindered in their plans when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">but no one laid a hand +on him: </span>for their rage was invisibly checked and restrained. This shows that a person has the will +to inflict injury from himself, while the power to inflict injury is from God. This is clear from the +first chapters of Job, where Satan was unable to torment Job except to the extent that he was +permitted to do so by God.</p> +<p>1069 The reason they were hindered was <span style="font-weight: bold">because his hour had not yet come. </span>Here we should +note that “There is a time and fitness for everything” (Ecc 8:6). However, the time for anything +is determined by its cause. Therefore, because the heavenly bodies are the cause of physical +effects, the time for those things that act in a physical way is determined by the heavenly bodies. +The soul, on the other hand, since it is not subject to any heavenly body in its intellect and reason +(for in this respect it transcends temporal causes) does not have times determined by the heavenly +bodies; rather, its times are determined by its cause, that is, God, who decrees what is to be done +and at what time: “Why is one day better than another? ... They are differentiated by the +knowledge of the Lord” (Si,33:7). Much less, therefore, is Christ’s time determined by these +bodies. Accordingly, his hour must be regarded as fixed not by fatal necessity, but by the entire +Trinity. For as Augustine says: “You should not believe this about yourself; and how much less +should you believe it about he who made you? If your hour is his will, that is, God’s, what is his +hour but his own will? Therefore, he was not speaking here of the hour in which he would be +forced to die, but rather of the hour in which he thought it fitting to be killed.” “My time has not +yet come,” as he said before (above 2:4); “Jesus knew that his time had come to leave this world +for the Father” (below 13:1).</p> +<p>1070 Then he mentions the effect his teaching had on those who were favorable. First, he shows +their faith: <span style="font-weight: bold">Many of the people, however, believed in him. </span>He does not say, “of the leaders,” +because the higher their rank, the further away they were from hirn. So there was no room in +them for wisdom: “Where there is humility, there is wisdom” (Prv 11:2).But the people, because +they were quick to see their own sickness, immediately recognized our Lord’s medicine: “You +have hidden these things from the wise and the prudent, and have revealed them to little ones” +(Mt 11:2 5). This is why in the beginning, it was the poor and the humble who were converted +to Christ: “God chose what is lowly and despised in the world, and things that are not, to destroy +those things that are” (1 Cor 1:28).</p> +<p>Secondly, he gives the motive for their faith when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">When the Christ comes, will he +work more wonders than this man has done?</span> For it had been prophesied that when the Christ +came, he would work many miracles: “God himself will come, and save us. Then the eyes of the +blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will hear” (Is 35:4). And so when they saw the +miracles Christ was accomplishing, they were led to believe. Yet their faith was weak, because +they were led to believe him not by his teaching, but by his miracles; whereas, since they were +already believers, and instructed by the law, they should have been influenced more by his +teaching: “Signs were given to unbelievers; while prophecies were given to believers, not to +unbelievers” (1 Cor 14:22).</p> +<p>Secondly, their faith was weak because they seemed to be expecting another Christ; thus they +say: <span style="font-weight: bold">When the Christ comes, will he work more wonders than this man has done? </span>From this +it is obvious that they did not believe in Christ as in God, but as in some just man or prophet. Or, +according to Augustine, they were reasoning this way: <span style="font-weight: bold">When the Christ comes, will he work +more wonders than this man has done? </span>As if to say: We were promised that the Christ would +come. But he will not work more signs than this man is doing. Therefore, either he is the Christ, +or there will be several Christs.</p> +<p>1071 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">The Pharisees heard the people saying these things about him, </span>we +see the effect this had on the Pharisees. And as Chrysostom says, Christ said many things, and +yet the Pharisees were not aroused against him. But when they saw that the people were +accepting him, they were immediately fired up against him; and in their madness they wanted to +kill him. This shows that the real reason why they hated him was not that he broke the sabbath; +what provoked them the most was the fact that the people were honoring Christ. And this is clear +below: “Do you not see that we can do nothing? Look, the entire world has gone after him!” +(12:19). Because they were afraid of the danger they did not dare to seize Christ themselves, but +they sent their officers, who were used to such things.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 4</span></p> +<BLOCKQUOTE><p>33 Jesus then said to them: +<dd>“For still a short time I am with you; +<dd>then I am going to him who sent me. +<dd>34 You will look for me, +<dd>and you will not find me; +<dd>and where I am, you will not be able to come.” +<BR>35 The Jews therefore said to one another: “Where is he going that we cannot find him? Is he +going to those dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles? 36 What does he mean by +saying, ‘You will look for me, and you will not find me’; and ‘where I am, you will not be able +to come’?”</p></BLOCKQUOTE> +<p>1072 After our Lord told the principle of his origin, he then mentions his end, i.e., where he +would go by dying. First, the end of Christ’s life is given; secondly, we see that the people are +puzzled by what he says (v 35). As to the first he does three things. First, the end of his life is +mentioned; secondly, he predicts what they will desire in the future (v 34); and thirdly, he +mentions one of their deficiencies (v 34b). He does two things about the first. First, he predicts +the delay of his death until later; and secondly, he states where he will go by dying (v 33b). And +so, in the first, he shows his power; and in the second, his will to suffer.</p> +<p>1073 Our Lord shows his power by the delaying of his death until later; because, although the +Jews wanted to seize him, they could not do this until Christ willed. “No one takes it from me, +but I lay it down of myself” (below 10:18). And so Jesus said: <span style="font-weight: bold">For still a short time I am with +you. </span>As if to say: You want to kill me; but this does not depend on your will, but on my will. And +I have decided that <span style="font-weight: bold">For still a short time I am with you; </span>so wait a while. You will do what you +want to do. These words of our Lord first of all satisfied those people who honored him, and +made them more eager to listen to him because there was only a short time left to receive his +teaching, as Chrysostom says. “While you have the light, believe in the light” (below 12:36). +Secondly, he satisfied those who were persecuting him. As if to say: Your desire for my death +will not be delayed long; so be patient, because it is <span style="font-weight: bold">a short time. </span>For I must accomplish my +mission: to preach, to perform miracles, and then to come to my passion. “Go and tell that fox +that I will work today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will finish my course” (Lk 13:32).</p> +<p>1074 There are three reasons why Christ wished to preach for only a short time. First, to show +his power, by transforming the entire world in such a brief time: “One day in your courts is better +than a thousand elsewhere” (Ps 83:11). Secondly, to arouse the desire of his disciples, i.e., to +desire him more (him whose physical presence they would have for only a short time): “The days +will come when you will desire to see one day of the Son of Man” (Lk 17:22). Thirdly, to +accelerate the spiritual progress of his disciples. For since the humanity of Christ is our way to +God, as it says below, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” (14:6), we should not rest in it +as a goal, but through it tend to God. And so that the hearts of his disciples, which were moved +by the physical presence of Christ, would not rest in him as man, he quickly took his physical +presence from them; thus he said: “It is advantageous for you that I go” (below 16:7); “If we +knew Christ according to the flesh (i.e., when he was physically present to us) now we no longer +know him in this way” (2 Cor 5:16).</p> +<p>1075 He shows his desire for his passion when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">I am going to him who sent me, </span>that +is, willingly, by my passion: “He was offered because it was his own will” (Is 53:7); “He gave +himself for us, an offering to God” (Eph 5:2). 1 am going, I say, to the Father, to him who sent +me. And this is appropriate, for everything naturally returns to its principle: “Rivers return to the +place from which they come” (Ecc 1:7); “Jesus ... knowing that he came from God, and was +going to God” (below 13:3). And again: “I am going to him who sent me” (below 16:5).</p> +<p>1076 When he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">You will look for me, and you will not find me, </span>he is predicting what the +Jews will desire in the times to Come. As if to say: You can enjoy my teaching for a short time; +but this brief time, which you are now rejecting, you will look for later, and you will not find it: +“Search for the Lord while he can be found” (Is 55:6); and “Seek the Lord (at the present time), +and your soul will live” (Ps 68:33).</p> +<p>1077 This statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">You will look for me, and you will not find me, </span>can be understood either +as a physical search for Christ or as a spiritual search. If we understand it as a physical search, +dien, according to Chrysostom, this is the way he was sought by the daughters of Jerusalem, i.e., +the women who cried for him, as Luke (23:27) mentions; and no doubt many others were affected +at the same time. It is not unreasonable to think that when trouble was near, especially when their +city was being captured, the Jews remembered Christ and his miracles and wished that he were +there to free them. And in this way, <span style="font-weight: bold">You will look for me, </span>i.e., for me to be physically present, +<span style="font-weight: bold">and you will not find me.</span></p> +<p>If we understand this as a spiritual search for Christ, then we should say, as Augustine does, that +although they refused to recognize Christ while he was among them, they later looked for him, +after they had seen the people believe and had themselves been stung by the crime of his death; +and they said to Peter: “Brothers, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37). In this way, they were looking +for Christ (whom they saw die as a result of their crime) when they believed in him who forgave +them.</p> +<p>1078 Then when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and where I am, you will not be able to come, </span>he points out one of +their deficiencies. He does not say, “and where I am going,” which would be more in keeping +with the earlier thought, “I am going,” to the Father, “to him who sent me.” He says rather, where +I am, to show that he is both God and man. He is man insofar as he is going: “I am going to him +who sent me” (below 16:5). But insofar as Christ had always been where he was about to return, +he shows that he is God: “No one has gone up to heaven except the One who came down from +heaven” (above 3:13). And so, as Augustine says, just as Christ returned in such a way as not to +leave us, so he came down to us, when he assumed visible flesh, but in such a way as still to be +in heaven according to his invisible greatness.</p> +<p>He does not say, “You will not find,” because some were about to go; but he does say, you will +not be able to come, i.e., as long as you keep your present attitude; for no one can obtain the +eternal inheritance. unless he is God’s heir. And one becomes an heir of God by faith in Christ: +“he gave them power to become the sons of God, to all who believe in his name” (above 1:12). +But the Jews did not yet believe in him; and so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">you will not be able to come. </span>In the +Psalm it is asked: “Who will ascend the mountain of the Lord?” And the answer given is: “Those +whose hands are innocent and whose hearts are clean” (Ps 23:3). But the hearts of the Jews were +not clean, nor were their hands innocent, because they wanted to kill Christ. And so he says: you +are not able to ascend the mountain of the Lord.</p> +<p>1079 Then (v 35), we see that this was bewildering to the Jews, who, although they thought of +Christ in a worldly way, still did believe to a certain extent. And three things happen here. First, +they are bewildered; secondly, they form an opinion, and thirdly, they argue against their own +opinion.</p> +<p>1080 They are perplexed when they say to each other: <span style="font-weight: bold">Where is he going that we cannot find +him? </span>For, as was said, they understood this in a physical way: “The sensual man does not +perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:14).</p> +<p>1081 And so they came to the opinion that Christ was going to go in a physical way, not by +dying, to some place where they would not be permitted to go. Thus they say: <span style="font-weight: bold">Is he going to +those dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles? </span>For the Gentiles were separated +from the way of life of the Jews: “separated from Israel’s way of life, strangers to the covenants, +without hope in the promise, and without God in this world” (Eph 2:12). And so they said, in a +way reproaching him, to those dispersed among the Gentiles, who had settled in many different +places: “These are the families of Noe ... and they settled among the nations on the earth after the +flood” (Gn 10:32). But the Jewish people were united by place, by their worship of the one God, +and by the observance of the law: “The Lord builds up Jerusalem, and he will gather the +dispersed of Israel” (Ps 146:2).</p> +<p>They did not say that he would go to the Gentiles to become a Gentile himself, but to bring them +back; and so they said, and teach the Gentiles. They probably took this from Isaiah (49:6): “I have +given you to be a light to the Gentiles, to be my salvation to the ends of the earth.” However, +even though they did not understand what they were saying (just as Caiphas did not understand +his own words: “It is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the entire nation +does not perish”), what they said was true, and they were predicting the salvation of the Gentiles, +as Augustine says, for Christ would go to the Gentiles, not in his own body, but by his feet, i.e., +his apostles. For he sent his own members to us to niake us his members. “And I have other +sheep that are not of this fold, and I must bring them also ... and there will be one fold and one<span style="font-weight: bold"> +</span>Shepherd” (below 10:16). And so Isaiah says, speaking for the Gentiles: “He will teach us his +ways” (Is 2:3).</p> +<p>1082 Finally, they saw an objection to their own opinion when they said: <span style="font-weight: bold">What does he mean +by saying</span> ... ? As if to say: If he had said only, <span style="font-weight: bold">You will look for me, and you will not find me</span>, +we could think that he was going to the Gentiles. But he seems to exclude this when he adds, +<span style="font-weight: bold">where I am, you will not be able to come</span>, for we can go to the Gentiles.</p> +<p style="margin-bottom: 0.125in; margin-bottom: 0.125in"> </p> +<p style="text-align: center"><span style="font-weight: bold">LECTURE 5</span></p> +<BLOCKQUOTE><p>37 On the last and greatest day of the festival Jesus stood up and cried out, saying: +<dd>“If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. +<dd>38 Whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures say, +<dd>out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.” +<br>39 (He said this concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in him would receive; for as +yet the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.) 40 From that moment +some of the people, hearing these words of his, said: “Truly, this is the Prophet.” 41 Others said: +“This is the Christ.” But others said: “Would the Christ come from Galilee? 42 Does not +Scripture say that the Christ will come from the seed of David, and from David’s town of +Bethlehem?” 43 And so there was dissension among the people because of him. 44 Although +some of them wanted to apprehend him, no one laid a hand on him. 45 So the officers returned +to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them: “Why have you not brought him?” 46 The +officers replied: “Never has any man spoken like this man.” 47 The Pharisees then retorted: +“Have you too been seduced? him, or any of the Pharisees? 48 Has any one of the rulers believed +in 49 But these people, who do not know the law, they are accursed.” 50 Nicodemus (the same +one who came to him at night, and was one of them) said: 51 “Does our law judge a man without +first hearing from him and knowing what he has done?” 52 They answered and said to him: “Are +you too a Galilean? Look at the Scriptures and see that the Prophet will not come from Galilee.” +53 Then every man returned to his own house.</p></BLOCKQUOTE> +<p>1083 After our Lord told them about the origin of his doctrine and of the teacher, as well as his +end, he now invites them to accept his teaching itself. First, we see Christ’s invitation; secondly, +the dissension among the people (v 40). He does three things about the first. First, he tells us the +manner of this invitation; secondly, we see the invitation itself (v 37); and thirdly, he explains +what it means (v 39). The manner of the invitation is described in three ways: by its time; by the +posture of the one inviting; and by his efforts.</p> +<p>1084 As to the time, we see that it was <span style="font-weight: bold">the last and greatest day of the festival. </span>For as we saw +before, this feast was celebrated for seven days, and the first and the last day were the more +solemn; just as with us, the first day of a feast and its octave are the more solemn. Therefore, +what our Lord did here he did not do on the first day, as he had not yet gone to Jerusalem, nor +in the intervening days, but on the last day. And he acted then because there are few who +celebrate feasts in a spiritual way. Consequently, he did not invite them to his teaching at the +beginning of the festival so that the trifles of the following days would not drive it from their +hearts; for we read that the word of the Lord is choked by thorns (Lk 8:7). But he did invite them +on the last day so that his teaching would be more deeply impressed on their hearts.</p> +<p>1085 As to his posture, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus stood up. </span>Here we should note that Christ taught both while sitting +and standing. He taught his disciples while sitting (Mt 5:1); while he stood when he taught the +people, as he is doing here. It is from this that we get the custom in the Church of standing when +preaching to the people, but sitting while preaching to religious and clerics. The reason for this +is that since the aim in preaching to the people is to convert them, it takes the form of an +exhortation; but when preaching is directed to clergy, already living in the house of God, it takes +the form of a reminder.</p> +<p>1086 As to his effort we read that he <span style="font-weight: bold">cried out, </span>in order to show his own assurance: “Raise up +your voice with strength ... raise it up, and do not be afraid” (Is 40:9); and so that all would be +able to hear him: “Cry out, and do not stop; raise your voice like a trumpet” (Is 58:1); and to +stress the importance of what he was about to say: “Listen to me, for I will tell you about great +things” (Prv 8:6).</p> +<p>1087 Next (v 37b), we see Christ’s invitation: first, those who are invited; secondly, the fruit of +this invitation.</p> +<p>1088 It is the thirsty who are invited. Thus he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and +drink; </span>“Come to the waters, all you who thirst” (Is 55:1). He calls the thirsty because such +people want to serve God. For God does not accept a forced service: “God loves a cheerful giver” +(2 Cor 9:7). So we read: “I will sacrifice freely” (Is 53:8). And such people are described in +Matthew this way: “Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for what is right” (Mt 5:6). Now our +Lord calls all of these people, not just some; and so he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">It anyone thirsts, </span>as if to say: +whoever it is. “Come to me, all you who desire me, and be filled with my fruits” (Sir 24:26); “He +desires the salvation of all” (1 Tim 2:4).</p> +<p>Jesus invites them to drink; and so he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">and drink. </span>For this drink is spiritual refreshment in +the knowledge of divine wisdom and truth, and in the realization of their desires: “My servants +will drink, and you will be thirsty” (Is 65:13), “Come and eat my bread, and drink the wine I have +mixed for you” (Prv 9:5), “She [wisdom] will give him the water of saving wisdom to drink” (Sir +15:3).</p> +<p>1089 The fruit of this invitation is that good things overflow upon others; thus he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever +believes in me, as the Scriptures say, out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water. +</span>According to Chrysostom, we should read this as follows: <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in me, as the +Scriptures say. </span>And then a new sentence begins: <span style="font-weight: bold">Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living +water. </span>For if we say: <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in me, </span>and follow this with, <span style="font-weight: bold">as the Scriptures say, out +of his heart shall flow rivers of living water, </span>it does not seem to be correct, for the statement, +<span style="font-weight: bold">out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water, </span>is not found in any book of the Old +Testament. So we should say: <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures say; </span>that is, according +to the teaching of the Scriptures. “Search the Scriptures ... they too bear witness to me” (above +5:39). And then there follows: <span style="font-weight: bold">Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water. </span>He says here, +<span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in me, </span>while before he said, “He who comes to me,” because to believe and +to come are the same thing: “Come to him and be enlightened,” as we read in the Psalm (33:6).</p> +<p>But Jerome punctuates this in a different way. He says that after <span style="font-weight: bold">Whoever believes in me, </span>there +follows, <span style="font-weight: bold">as the Scriptures say, out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water. </span>And he says +that this phrase was taken from Proverbs (5:15): “Drink the water from your own cistern, and +from the streams of you own well. Let your fountains flow far and wide.”</p> +<p>1090 We should note, with Augustine, that rivers come from fountains as their source. Now one +who drinks natural water does not have either a fountain or a river within himself, because he +takes only a small portion of water. But one who drinks by believing in Christ draws in a fountain +of water; and when he draws it in, his conscience, which is the heart of the inner man, begins to +live and it itself becomes a fountain. So we read above: “The water that I give will become a +fountain within him” (4:14). This fountain which is taken in is the Holy Spirit, of whom we read: +“With you is the fountain of life” (Ps 35:10). Therefore, whoever drinks the the gifts of the +graces, which are signified by the rivers, in such a way that he alone benefits, will not have living +water flowing from his heart. But whoever acts quickly to help others, and to share with them the +various gifts of grace he has received from God, will have living water flowing from his heart. +This is why Peter says: “According to the grace each has received, let them use it to benefit one +another” (1 Pet 4:10).</p> +<p>He says, <span style="font-weight: bold">rivers, </span>to indicate the abundance of the spiritual gifts which were promised to those who +believe: “The river of God is full of water” (Ps 64:10) ; and also their force or onrush: “When +they rush to Jacob, Israel will blossom and bud, and they will fill the surface of the earth with +fruit” (Is 27:6); and again, “The rush of the rivers gives joy to the city of God” (Ps 45:5). Thus, +because the Apostle was governed by the impulsive force and fervor of the Holy Spirit, he said: +“The love of Christ spurs us on” (2 Cor 5:14); and “Those who are led by the Spirit of God are +the sons of God” (Rom 8:14). The separate distribution of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is also +indicated, for we read, “to one the gift of healing ... to another the gift of tongues” (1 Cor 12:10). +These gifts are “rivers of living water” because they flow directly from their source, which is the +indwelling Holy Spirit.</p> +<p>1091 Then (v 39), he explains what he said. First we see the explanation; secondly, the reason +behind this explanation (v 39b).</p> +<p>1092 Christ had said: “out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.” The Evangelist tells us +that we should understand this <span style="font-weight: bold">concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in him would +receive, </span>because the Spirit is the fountain and river of life. He is the fountain of which we read: +“With you is the fountain of life; and in your light we will see light” (Ps 35:10). And the Spirit +is a river because he proceeds from the Father and the Son: “The angel then showed me the river +of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (Rv 22:1). +“He gave the Spirit,” that is, to those who obey him (Is 42:1).</p> +<p>1093 He gives the reason behind this explanation, saying, <span style="font-weight: bold">for as yet the Spirit had not been +given. </span>And he says two things. <span style="font-weight: bold">as yet the Spirit had not been given, </span>and that <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus had not yet +been glorifled.</span></p> +<p>There are two opinions about the first of these. For Chrysostom says that before the resurrection +of Christ the Holy Spirit was not given to the apostles with respect to the gifts of prophecy and +miracles. And so this grace, which was given to the prophets, was not to he found on earth until +Christ came, and after that it was not given to anyone until the above mentioned time. And if +anyone objects that the apostles cast out devils before the resurrection, it should be understood +that they were cast out by that power which was from Christ, not by the Spirit; for when he sent +them out, we do not read that he gave them the Holy Spirit, but rather that “he gave them power +over unclean spirits” (Mt 10:1).</p> +<p>However, this seems to conflict with what our Lord says in the Gospel of’ Luke: “If I cast out +devils by Beelzebub, by whom do your children cast them out’?” (Lk 11:19). But it is certain that +our Lord cast out devils by the Holy Spirit, as the children did also, that is, the apostles, +Therefore, it is clear that they had received the Holy Spirit. And so we must say, with Augustine, +that the apostles had the Holy Spirit before the resurrection, even with respect to the gifts of +prophecy and miracles. And when we read here that <span style="font-weight: bold">as yet the Spirit had not been given, </span>we +should understand this to refer to a more abundant giving, and one with visible signs, as the Spirit +was given to them in tongues of fire after the resurrection and ascension.</p> +<p>1094 But since the Holy Spirit sanctifies the Church and is even now received by those who +believe, why does no one speak in the languages of all nations as then? My answer is that it is +not necessary, as Augustine says. For now the universal Church speaks the languages of all the +nations, because the love of charity is given by the Holy Spirit: “The love of God is poured out +into our hearts by the Holy Spirit” (Rom 5:5); and this love, making all things common, makes +everyone speak to everyone else. As Augustine says: “If you love unity, then you have everything +that anyone else has in it (i.e., in the Church). Give up your envy, and what I have is also yours; +ill-will divides, the love of charity unites. If you have this love, you will have everything.” But +at the beginning, before the Church was spread throughout the world, because it had few +members, they had to speak the languages of all so that they could establish the Church among +all.</p> +<p>1095 With regard to the second point, we should note that Augustine thinks the statement, <span style="font-weight: bold">Jesus +had not yet been glorified, </span>should be understood as the glory of the resurrection. As if to say: +Jesus had not yet risen from the dead or ascended into heaven. We read about this below: +“Father, glorify me” (17:5). And the reason why Christ willed to be glorified before he gave the +Holy Spirit is that the Holy Spirit is given to us so that we might raise our hearts from the love +of this world in a spiritual resurrection, and turn completely to God. To those who are afire with +the love of the Holy Spirit, Christ promised eternal life, where we will not die, and where we will +have no fear. And for this reason he did not wish to give the Holy Spirit until he was glorified, +so that he might show in his body the life for which we hope in the resurrection.</p> +<p>1096 For Chrysostom, however, this statement does not refer to the glory of the resurrection, but +to the glorification of the passion. When his passion was near, our Lord said: “Now the Son of +Man is glorified” (below 13:3 1). So, according to this view, the Holy Spirit was first given after +the passion, when our Lord said to his apostles: “Receive the Holy Spirit” (below 20:22). The +Holy Spirit was not given before the passion because, since it is a gift, it should not be given to +enemies, but to friends. But We were enemies. Thus it was necessary that first the victim be +offered on the altar of the cross, and enmity be destroyed in his flesh, so that by this we might +be reconciled to God by the death of his Son; and then, having been made friends, we could +receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.</p> +<p>1097 The Evangelist, having shown us Christ’s invitation to a spiritual drink, now presents the +disagreement of the people. First, the disagreement among the people themselves; secondly, that +of their leaders (v 45). He does two things about the first. First, he states what those who +disagreed said; secondly, he states the fact that there was a disagreement (v 43).</p> +<p>What the people said varied according to their different opinions about Christ. And he gives three +of their opinions: two of these were the opinions of those who were coming for spiritual drink; +and the third was held by those who shrank from it.</p> +<p>1098 The first opinion was that Christ was the Prophet. So he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">From that moment, </span>i.e., +from the time Christ had spoken on the great day of the feast, <span style="font-weight: bold">hearing these words of his, some +of the people said, </span>i.e., those who had now begun to drink that water spiritually, <span style="font-weight: bold">Truly, this is +the Prophet. </span>They did not just call him a prophet, but <span style="font-weight: bold">the Prophet, </span>thinking that he was the one +about whom Moses foretold: “The Lord your God will raise up a prophet for you from your +brothers ... you will listen to him” (Dt 18:15).</p> +<p>1099 Another opinion was of those who said, <span style="font-weight: bold">This is the Christ. </span>These people had drawn closer +to that [spiritual] drink, and had slaked the thirst of unbelief to a greater extent. This is what Peter +himself professed: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16).</p> +<p>1100 The third opinion conflicts with the other two. First, those who hold this disagree with +those who say that Jesus is the Christ; secondly, they support their opinion with an authority. So +he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">But others said, </span>those remaining in the dryness of unbelief, <span style="font-weight: bold">Would the Christ come +from Galilee? </span>For they knew that it was not predicted by the prophets that the Christ would +come from Galilee. And they said what they did because they thought that Jesus had been born +in Nazareth, not knowing that it was really in Bethlehem: for it was well known that he had been +brought up in Nazareth, but only a few knew where he was born. Nevertheless, although the +Scripture does not say that the Christ would be born in Galilee, it did foretell that he would first +start out from there: “The people who walked in darkness saw a great light, and on those who +lived in the region of the shadow of death, a light has risen” (Is 9:1). It even foretold that the +Christ would come from Nazareth: “A flower will rise up from his roots” (Is 11:1 ), where the +Hebrew version reads: “A Nazarene will rise up from his roots.”</p> +<p>1101 They support their objection by the authority of Scripture when they say, <span style="font-weight: bold">Does not +Scripture say that the Christ will come from the seed of David, and from David’s town of +Bethlehem? </span>We read in Jeremiah (23:5) that Jesus would come from the seed of David: “I will +raise up a just branch for David.” And we see that David was “the anointed of God” (2 Sm 23:1). +In Micah (5:2) we read that Jesus would come from Bethlehem: “And you, Bethlehem, land of +Judah: from you there will come forth, for me, a ruler of Israel.”</p> +<p>1102 Then (v 43), the disagreement among the people is mentioned; secondly, the attempt of +some of them to seize Christ; and thirdly, the failure of their attempt.</p> +<p>1103 <span style="font-weight: bold">And so there was dissension among the people because of him, </span>that is, Christ. For it +often happens that when the truth is made known, it causes dissensions and uneasiness in the +hearts of the wicked. So Jeremiah says, representing Christ: “Woe is me, my mother! Why did +you give birth to me as a man of strife and dissension for all the earth” (Jer 15:10). And our Lord +said: “I have not come to send peace, but the sword” (Mt 10:34).</p> +<p>1104 Some of them attempted to seize Christ; so he says, some of them, that is, those who had +said, “Would the Christ come from Galilee?” <span style="font-weight: bold">wanted to apprehend him, </span>to kill him out of +hatred: “Pursue and seize him” (Ps 70:11); “The enemy said: ‘I will pursue and seize’ “ (Ex +15:9). On the other hand, those who are good and those who believe want to seize Christ to enjoy +him: “I will go up into the palm tree and seize its fruit” (Sg 7:8).</p> +<p>1105 But they were frustrated by the power of Christ. So he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">no one laid a hand on him, +</span>that is, because Jesus was not willing that they do so, for this depended on his power: “No one +takes my soul from me, but I lay it down of myself” (below 10. 18). Accordingly, when Christ +did will to suffer, he did not wait for them, but he offered himself to them: “Jesus stepped +forward and said to them: ‘Whom are you looking for?” (below 18:4).</p> +<p>1106 Then (v 45), we see the dissension of the leaders of the people: first, their disagreement +with their officers; and secondly, the disagreement among themselves (v 50). He does three +things about the first: first, he shows the leaders rebuking their officers; secondly, the testimony +the officers gave about Christ; and thirdly, we see the leaders reprimanding their own officers.</p> +<p>1107 As to the first, let us note the evil of the leaders, that is, the chief priests and Pharisees, +when they say to their officers. <span style="font-weight: bold">Why have you not brought him? </span>For their evil was so great that +their own officers could not please them unless they injured Christ: “They cannot sleep unless +they have done something evil” (Prv 4:16).</p> +<p>There is a problem here about the literal meaning of the text. For since it was said before that the +officers were sent to apprehend Jesus when the festival was half over (v 32), that is, on the fourth +day, and here we read that they returned on the seventh day, “On the last and greatest day of the +festival” (v 37), it seems that the Evangelist overlooked the days inbetween. There are two +answers to this: either the Evangelist anticipated the disagreement among the people, or the +officers had returned before, but it is just mentioned now to show the reason why there was +dissension among the leaders.</p> +<p>1108 As to the second point, let us realize how good these officers were in giving this +praiseworthy testimony about Christ, saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">Never has any man spoken like this man. </span>They +deserve our praise for three reasons. First, because of their admiration: for they admired Christ +because of his teachings, not his miracles. And this brought them nearer to the truth, and further +from the custom of the Jews, who looked for signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians (1:22). Secondly, +we should praise them because of the ease with which they were won over: because with just a +few words, Christ had captivated them and had drawn their love. Thirdly, because of their +confidence: because it was to the Pharisees, who were the enemies of Christ, that they said: +<span style="font-weight: bold">Never has any man spoken like this man. </span>And these things are to be expected, for Jesus was +not just a man, but the Word of God; and so his words had power to affect people. “Are not my +words like fire, says the Lord, and like a hammer breaking a rock?” (Jer 23:29). And so Matthew +says: “He was teaching them as one who had authority” (Mt 7:29). And his words were sweet to +contemplate: “Let your voice sound in my ears, for your voice is sweet” (Sg 2:14); “How sweet +are your words to my tongue! “ (Ps 118:103). And his words were useful to keep in mind, +because they promised eternal life: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal +life” (above 6:69); “I am the Lord, who teaches you things that are useful” (Is 48:17).</p> +<p>1109 As to the third point, see the treachery of the Jews in living to alienate the officers from +Christ; <span style="font-weight: bold">The Pharisees then reforted, to the </span>officers, <span style="font-weight: bold">Have you too been seduced? </span>Here they +do three things. First, they attack what they consider a mistake of their officers; secondly, they +hold up their leaders as an example; and in from him and the third place, they reject the example +of the people.</p> +<p>1110 They attack the officers when they say, <span style="font-weight: bold">Have you too been seduced? </span>As if to say: We see +that what he said was pleasing to you. As a matter of fact, they had been seduced, but in an +admirable way, because the left the evil of unbelief and were brought to the truth of the faith. We +read about this: “You seduced me, O Lord, and I was seduced” (Jer 20:7).</p> +<p>1111 Then they appeal to their rulers as an example, to turn the officers further from Christ, +saying: <span style="font-weight: bold">Has any one of the rulers believed in him, or any of the Pharisees? </span>There are two +reasons why a person should be believed: either because of some authority or because of a +religious disposition. And they say that none of these are found with Christ. As if to say: If Christ +were worthy to be received, then our rulers, who have authority, would have accepted him; and +so would the Pharisees, who have a religious disposition. But none of these believe in him; and +so neither should you believe in him. This fulfills the saying: “The stone that the builders (that +is, the rulers and the Pharisees) rejected has become the cornerstone (that is, in the hearts of the +people). The Lord has done this,” because his goodness is greater than man’s evil (Ps 117:22).</p> +<p>1112 They reject the statements of the people because they are a rebuke to their own evil. So they +say: <span style="font-weight: bold">But these people, who do not know the law, they are accursed; </span>therefore, you should not +agree with them. This thought was found in Deuteronomy: “Accursed are they who do not live +within the law and do not act according to it” (Dt 27:26). But they did not understand this +correctly, because even those who do not have a knowledge of the law but act in harmony with +it, live more within the law than those who do have a knowledge of the law yot do not keep it. +It is said about such people: “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from +me” (Mt 15:8); and in James (1:22): “Be a doer of the word, and not just a hearer.”</p> +<p>1113 Next, we see the dissension among the rulers. First, the advice of Nicodemus is given; +secondly, the opposition of the rulers; and thirdly, the outcome of the whole affair. The +Evangelist does two things about the first: first, he tells us something about Nicodemus; +secondly, he gives his advice.</p> +<p>1114 He tells us three things about Nicodemus: the first two show us the attitude of Nicodemus +himself; and the second reveals the malice of the rulers. The first concerns the faith of +Nicodemus, and he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Nicodemus, who came to him, </span>i.e., who believed, for to come to Christ +is the same as to believe in him. The second shows the imperfection of his faith, because he came +<span style="font-weight: bold">at night. </span>For if he had believed perfectly, he would not have been fearful, for as we read below +( 12:42): “Many of the rulers believed in him, but they did not admit it because of the Pharisees, +so that they would not be expelled from the synagogue.” And one of these was Nicodemus.</p> +<p>The third thing the Evangelist tells us shows us that the rulers did not speak the truth: for they +said that none of the rulers, or of the Pharisees, believed in Christ. And so the Evangelist says +about Nicodemus that he was one of them: as if to say: If Nicomedus, who was one of the rulers, +believed in Christ, then the rulers and Pharisees are speaking falsely when they say that none of +the rulers believed in him. “Truly, a lie was spoken” (Jer 16:19).</p> +<p>1115 The advice of Nicodemus is given when he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Does our law judge a man without first +hearing from him and knowing what he has done? </span>For according to the civil laws, a judgment +was only to be given after a complete investigation. This is why we read: “It is not the custom +of the Romans to condemn any man before he has his accusers face him, and can defend himself +from the charges” (Acts 25:16). “I diligently investigated the stranger’s cause” (Jb 29:16). And +so the law of Moses says: “Do not condemn one who is innocent and just, because I hate the +wicked” (Ex 23:7).</p> +<p>Nicodemus said what he did because he believed in Christ and wanted to convert them to Christ; +yet because he was afraid, he did not act very candidly. He thought that if they would only listen +to Christ, the words of Christ would be so effective that perhaps they would be changed like +those whom they sent to Jesus, and who, when they heard Christ, were turned aside from the very +act for which they had been sent.</p> +<p>1116 We see the opposition of the rulers to Nicodemus when he says, <span style="font-weight: bold">They answered and said +to him. </span>First, they think that he has been seduced; and secondly, that he does not know the law.</p> +<p>As to the first, they say: <span style="font-weight: bold">Are you too a Galilean? </span>that is, one who has been seduced by this +Galilean. For they considered Christ a Galilean because he lived in Galilee. And so anyone who +followed Christ they derisively called a Galilean. “The girl servant said to Peter: ‘You are a +Galilean, are you not” (Mt 26:69), “Do you also want to become his disciples?” (below 9:27).</p> +<p>About his ignorance of the law, they say: <span style="font-weight: bold">Look at the Scriptures and see that the Prophet will +not come from Galilee. </span>But since Nicodemus was a teacher of the law, he did not have to look +again. It is as if they were saying: Although you are a teacher, you do not know this. Something +like this was said before: “You are a teacher in Israel and you do not know these things?” (above +3:10). Now even though the Old Testament does not explicitly say that a prophet will come<span style="font-weight: bold"> </span>from +Galilee, it does say that the Lord of the prophets would come from there, according to: “A flower +(i.e., a Nazarene) will arise from his root ... and the Spirit of the Lord will rest upon him,” as we +read in Isaiah (11:1).</p> +<p>1117 The outcome of this dissension is seen to be useless. So he says: <span style="font-weight: bold">Then every man +returned, </span>leaving the matter unfinished, to his own house, i.e., to what belonged to him, empty +of faith and frustrated in his evil desires. “He frustrates the plans of the wicked” (Jb 5:13); “God +destroys the plans of rulers, and frustrates the schemes of the people” (Ps 3 2:10).</p> +<p>Or, each returned <span style="font-weight: bold">to his own house, </span>i.e., to the evil of his unbelief and irreverence. “I know +where you live: where the throne of Satan is. You hold to my name, and you have not denied my +faith” (Rv 2:13).</p> +</body> + +</html>