Commentary on the Gospel of John

In this discourse the Lord intended especially to strengthen the minds of the disciples against two things: namely, against one thing that was imminent in the present, which was his Passion; and another that was feared for the future, namely the tribulation that was to come upon them. Hence against these two things he had said to them, "let not your heart be troubled," as to the first, "nor let it be afraid," as to the second. Therefore, after he had strengthened them concerning his departure, here he strengthens them against the tribulations that were to come upon them, and first he sets before them a certain likeness; second, from that likeness he proceeds to his intended point, at "now you are clean." Now the likeness is of the vine and the husbandman. Hence he first sets forth the vine; second he introduces the husbandman; third he commends the husbandman's care concerning the branches.

But the vine is he himself; hence he says by way of a certain likeness, "I am the vine," because just as the vine, although it may seem lowly, nevertheless surpasses all other trees in the sweetness of its fruit, so Christ, even though he seemed lowly to the world—because he was poor and seemed of no repute and bore reproach—nevertheless brought forth the sweetest fruits; according to that word of the Song of Songs 2:3: "his fruit is sweet to my throat." And therefore Christ is the vine bringing forth wine that inebriates within, which is the wine of compunction; Psalm 59:5: "you have given us to drink the wine of compunction." Again, a wine that strengthens, namely of our refreshment; above, John 6:56: "my blood is drink indeed." For so above he compared himself to a grain of wheat, because his flesh is truly food.

This is that vine of which it is said in Genesis 40:9: "I saw before me a vine having three branches"—that is, Christ, in whom there are three substances, namely body and soul and divinity. This is also the vine of which Jacob speaks in Genesis (the second-to-last chapter), 49:11: "you shall bind your ass, my son, to the vine"—that is, the Church.

But this vine is true. Here it must be known that "true" is sometimes distinguished against the merely apparent, as a true man is distinguished from a painted man; sometimes against the corrupted, as vinegar is distinguished from wine, because it is corrupted wine. This, then, which is said, "I am the true vine," is taken in the second way, so that he may distinguish himself from the corrupted vine, namely from the people of the Jews, of whom it is said in Jeremiah 2:21: "how have you been turned into the bitterness of a strange vine?" And this is so because it did not produce grapes but wild grapes; Isaiah 5:4: "I looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes."

But it must be noted that in Christ there is a twofold nature, namely divine and human: and according to the human nature he agrees with us, and is less than the Father; according to the divine nature he agrees with God, and is above us. He is, therefore, the true vine according to this, that he, the man Christ Jesus, is the head of the Church. And this he intimates by introducing the husbandman, who is the Father; hence he says, "and my Father is the husbandman." For if he were the vine according to the divine nature, the Father would be a vine just as the Son is; but since it is according to the human nature that he is the vine, therefore the Father stands to him as a husbandman to a vine. He himself also, insofar as he is God, is the husbandman.

Now one is called a "husbandman" from cultivation; hence also the vinedresser, insofar as he cultivates, is a husbandman. But since to cultivate is to devote care, we cultivate something in two ways. Either so that what we cultivate may be improved: and in this way we cultivate a field, or something of that sort. In another way, so that we ourselves may be improved through it; and in this way a man cultivates wisdom. God, therefore, cultivates us so that we may be made better by his work, insofar as he uproots the bad seeds from our hearts. He opens our heart with the plough of his word; he plants the seeds of the precepts; he gathers the fruit of piety, as Augustine says. We, however, cultivate him so that we may be made better through him, but this by worshiping, not by ploughing; above, John 9:31: "if any man be a worshiper of God ... him he hears."

The Father, then, is the husbandman of this vine for the good of another. For he himself plants it; Jeremiah 2:21: "I planted you a chosen vineyard, all true seed." He himself gives the increase; 1 Corinthians 3:6: "I planted, Apollo watered, but God gave the increase," because God alone increases inwardly and makes fruitful: however much man may cooperate outwardly, it is he who guards and preserves; in Matthew 21:33 and Isaiah 5:2 it is said that he built a tower in the vineyard and surrounded it with a hedge.

Now the husbandman's care is directed to two things: to the vine and to the branches. But the vine of which we speak here was perfect, not needing the husbandman's care; hence the whole of the husbandman's care was to be devoted to the branches, and therefore he says, "every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he will take it away." Now the branches are of the nature of the vine: hence those who cleave to Christ are the branches of this vine; Ezekiel 17:6: "it became a vine in spreading branches."

Concerning this, then, he does two things. First he sets down this husbandman's care concerning the bad branches; second, concerning the good branches. Now his care concerning the bad ones is that they be cut off from the vine; hence he says "every branch"—that is, every believer—"not bearing fruit," namely on the vine, "in me," without whom nothing can bear fruit, "he will take it away," namely from the vine. From which it appears that some are cut off from Christ not only because they do evil things, but also because they neglect to do good things; 2 Corinthians 6:1: "we exhort you that you receive not the grace of God in vain." Hence the Apostle said of himself, 1 Corinthians 15:10: "by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace in me has not been void." And in Matthew 25:28 it is said that the talent was taken away from him who did not make fruit from it, but hid it; in Luke 13:7 the lord commanded the barren fig tree to be cut down.

Now his care concerning the good branches is that they be fostered so as to bear more fruit; hence he says, "and every one that beareth fruit, he will purge it, that it may bring forth more fruit." For literally, in a natural vine it happens that a branch having many shoots bears less fruit because the moisture is diffused among all of them, and therefore cultivators, so that it may bear more fruit, purge it of the superfluous shoots. So it is in man. For if a man well disposed and joined to God inclines his affection to diverse things, his power is diminished, and he becomes less effective for acting well. And hence it is that God, so that he may bear fruit well, frequently cuts away such impediments beforehand and purges him, sending in tribulations and temptations, by which he may become stronger for acting. And therefore he says "he will purge it," even if it already exists pure: because no one in this life is so pure that he does not need to be purged more and more; 1 John 1:8: "if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." And this so that it may bring forth more fruit, that is, that he may grow in virtue, so that the more purified they are, the more fruitful they may be; Apocalypse (the last chapter), 22:11: "he that is just, let him be justified still, and he that is holy, let him be sanctified still"; Colossians 1:6: "the word of the Gospel bringeth forth fruit and groweth"; Psalm 83:8: "they shall go from virtue to virtue."

Here from the likeness he pursues his intended point. Now two things were touched upon in the aforesaid likeness in the comparison of the branches to the vine. One is the adherence of the branches to the vine; the second is the purging of the branches. First, therefore, he deals with the adherence; second, with the purging, at "if the world hate you, know ye that it hath hated me before you." Concerning the first, he first admonishes the disciples to adhere to the vine; second, he adduces reasons for adherence, at "as the branch cannot bear fruit of itself," etc.; third, he assigns the manner of adherence, at "as the Father hath loved me, I also have loved you."

Concerning the first he does two things. First he calls to their remembrance the benefit they have received; second he admonishes them to remain in him, at "abide in me, and I in you." They have received the benefits of cleansing, hence he says, "now you are clean"; as if to say: I have said such things about the branches; but you are branches already prepared, purged, for bearing fruit, and this on account of the word which I have spoken to you.

For the word of Christ cleanses, first indeed, from errors, by instructing; Titus 1:9: "embracing that faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort in sound doctrine, and to convince the gainsayers." And this because in the words of God no falsehood is found; Proverbs 8:9: "my words are right." He says, therefore, "you are clean," from Jewish errors.

Second, it cleanses hearts from earthly affections, by inflaming them toward heavenly things. For the word of God, by its power, shakes the heart of man which is weighed down toward earthly things, and from this it is set aflame; Jeremiah 23:29: "are not my words as it were a fire?"

Third, the word of God cleanses from sins, when invoked in Baptism. For men are cleansed in Baptism because the word cleanses in the water; because, as Augustine says: "take away the word, what is water but water? The word is added to the element, and it becomes a sacrament." The word, then, causes the water to touch the body, and to wash the heart. The word, I say, not because it is spoken, but because it is believed. For this word of faith avails so much in the Church that it even cleanses little infants themselves, although they are not able to believe, by the faith of those who believe, who offer, who bless, and who touch them as it is uttered; Matthew (the last chapter), 28:19: "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Fourth, it cleanses through the power of faith; Acts 15:9: "purifying their hearts by faith." He says therefore to them, "you," now instructed, now moved, now baptized, now confirmed in faith, "are clean because of the word which I have spoken to you." Above, in the same Gospel: "you are clean, but not all."

But since he had said above that it is the office of the husbandman to purge, by calling his own word purgative he plainly shows himself to be the husbandman. And truly he himself, insofar as he is God, is the cleanser of the branches, and the husbandman.

Here he leads them on to perseverance; as if he were to say: because you are clean, and have received so great a benefit, you ought to persevere in it. Hence he says, "abide in me," through charity—1 John 4:16: "he that abideth in charity abideth in God"—and through participation in the sacraments—above, John 6:57: "he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me." He says, therefore, "abide in me," by receiving grace, "and I in you," by my helping you.

Accordingly, when he says, "as the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abide in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in me," he adduces reasons for adherence, which are four. The first is taken from the sanctification of those who adhere; the second from the punishment of those who do not adhere, at "if any one abide not in me, he shall be cast forth"; the third from the attainment of the will of those who adhere, at "if you abide in me ... whatsoever you will, you shall ask, and it shall be done unto you"; the fourth from the glorification of God, at "in this is my Father glorified," and so on.

Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows that adherence to Christ is necessary for bearing fruit; second, that it is effective, at "he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit." Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the likeness; second he shows it to be fitting.

He says, therefore, as to the first: I say that you ought to abide in me in order that you may bear fruit, because, just as the branch—literally, the material branch—cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abide in the vine, from whose root the sap rises for the nourishing of the branches, so too you—understand: you cannot bear fruit unless you abide in me. Abiding in Christ, then, is the reason for fruit-bearing. Hence, of those who do not abide in Christ it is said, Romans 6:21: "what fruit therefore had you then in those things of which you are now ashamed?" Job 15:34: "the congregation of hypocrites is barren."

Now this likeness is fitting: "because I am the vine, and you the branches," as if he were to say: such is your relation to me, as that of branches to the vine. Of these branches it is said in Psalm 79:12: "she stretched forth her branches unto the sea."

Here he shows that abiding in Christ is efficacious, and first he shows its efficacy; second he adds the cause of that efficacy.

He says, therefore, first: I say that not only is man's abiding in me necessary for him to bear fruit, but it is also efficacious; because "he that abideth in me"—by believing, obeying, persevering—"and I in him"—by enlightening, helping, giving perseverance—"the same," and no other, "beareth much fruit." He bears, I say, a threefold fruit in this life. The first is to abstain from sins; Isaiah 27:9: "this is all the fruit, that sin should be taken away." The second is to devote oneself to works of holiness; Romans 6:22: "you have your fruit unto sanctification," and so on. The third fruit is to devote oneself to the edification of others; Psalm 103:13: "the earth shall be filled with the fruit of thy works." He also bears a fourth fruit in eternal life; above, John 4:36: "he gathereth fruit unto life everlasting." This is the last and perfect fruit of our labors; Wisdom 3:15: "glorious is the fruit of good labors."

Now the reason for this efficacy is that "without me you can do nothing." In this he both instructs the hearts of the humble, and stops the mouths of the proud, and especially of the Pelagians, who say that the good works of the virtues and of the law can be done by men of themselves, without the help of God: in which, while they wish to assert free will, they cast it down all the more. For behold, the Lord here says that without him we can do not only great things, but not even the smallest things—indeed, nothing at all. Nor is this strange, since not even God does anything without him; above, John 1:3: "without him was made nothing."

For our works are either by the power of nature, or from divine grace. If by the power of nature, since all the motions of nature are from the Word of God himself, no nature can be moved to do anything without him. But if by the power of grace: since he himself is the author of grace—because "grace and truth were made through Jesus Christ," as is said above, John 1:17—it is manifest that no meritorious work can be done without him; 2 Corinthians 3:5: "not that we are sufficient to think anything of ourselves, as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is from God." If, then, we cannot even think except from God, much less can we do other things.

Here is set down the second reason for adherence, which is taken from the threat of punishment; because unless we abide in him, we shall not escape punishment. And he sets down five things which aggravate that punishment: of which one pertains to the punishment of loss, namely expulsion from glory; hence he says, "he shall be cast forth." But we sometimes see that in a material vine some branch remains by an outward connection, but not by a participation in the sap: so too some remain in Christ only through faith, yet do not participate in the sap of the vine, because they are not in charity. Hence such will be cast forth, that is, they will be separated from the fellowship of the good; Ezekiel 34: "I will stand, and will separate," and so on.

The second punishment of loss is withering; hence he says, "and shall wither." Hence whatever it had from the root, it will lose, stripped of its help and life. For bad Christians seem to have some greenness; but when they are separated from the saints and from Christ, their dryness will appear; Psalm 21:16: "my strength is dried up like a potsherd."

The third punishment is their association with the wicked; hence he says, "and they shall gather it up," namely the reaping angels, to the wicked; and this indeed is the greatest punishment. For if to be with the wicked even for an hour is a great punishment, how much more to be perpetually with the worst of men and with demons? Isaiah 24:22: "they shall be gathered together as in the gathering of one bundle into the pit"; Matthew 13:30: "gather up first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to burn."

The fourth punishment is of sense; hence he says, "and cast into the fire," namely the eternal fire; Ezekiel 15:2, 4: "what shall be done with the wood of the vine? ... behold, it is given to the fire for fuel." For pieces of wood, if they do not remain on the vine, are more contemptible than other wood; but if they remain on the vine, they are more glorious. Hence Augustine says: "one of two things befits the branch, either the vine or the fire: if it is not in the vine, it will be in the fire." Matthew 25:41: "depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire."

The fifth punishment is the perpetual experience of fire; hence he adds, "and it burneth," forever; Matthew 25:46: "these shall go into everlasting punishment."

Here is set down the third reason for adherence, which is taken from the efficacy of obtaining what one asks, as if he were to say: if you abide in me, you will attain this fruit, namely, "whatsoever you will, you shall ask, and it shall be done unto you." But it must be noted that above, in the admonition to adherence, he set down two things, which he here resumes. The first, namely "abide in me," which he resumes here by saying "if you abide in me." The second, "and I in you"; and in place of this he says, "and my words abide in you." Because Christ is the Word of the Father, all the words of wisdom are from him; Ecclesiasticus 1:5: "the word of God on high is the fountain of wisdom." It is manifest, then, that Christ is in us when the words of his wisdom are in us; above, John 5:38: "you have not the word of God abiding in you."

Therefore he says, "and my words abide in you," namely in a fourfold manner: by loving, by believing, by meditating, and by fulfilling; Proverbs 4:20: "my son, hearken to my words"—that is, by believing—"and incline thy ear to my sayings"—that is, by obeying, or fulfilling—"let them not depart from thy eyes"—by meditating—"keep them in the midst of thy heart"—by loving; Jeremiah 15:16: "thy words were found, and I did eat them." The words of Christ, then, are in us when we do what he has commanded, and love what he has promised. And from this it follows that we are instructed as to what we ought to ask; Romans 8:26: "we know not what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself asketh for us with unspeakable groanings." Hence he also taught us to pray with his own words, Matthew 6:9 and Luke 11:2. Thus, then, the words of God believed and meditated upon instruct us to ask for what is necessary for us unto salvation. But the words of God loved and fulfilled help us to merit; and therefore he adds, "whatsoever you will, you shall ask"—discreetly, perseveringly—"and it shall be done unto you"; below, John 16:23: "if you ask the Father any thing in my name, he will give it you."

Here is set down the fourth reason for adherence, which is taken from the glory of the Father. We ought to refer all our works to the glory of God; Psalm 113:1: "not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory"; 1 Corinthians 10:31: "whether you eat or drink, or whatsoever else you do, do all to the glory of God." The Lord shows, therefore, that we are in Christ, because from this we bear fruit, and from our fruit-bearing the Father is glorified; hence he says, "in this is my Father glorified," that is, it redounds to the glory of the Father, "that you bring forth very much fruit."

He sets down here three things, in reverse order, which follow upon one another. One pertains to adherence, namely "that you become my disciples," which is the same as "abide in me." And from this follows the second, namely that "you bring forth very much fruit." And from this "my Father is glorified": as if he were to say: it is to the glory of the Father that you bring forth very much fruit, and you bring forth very much fruit from this, that you are my disciples. First indeed by living well; Matthew 5:16: "that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father"; and by teaching well, from which likewise God is glorified, Isaiah 24:15: "glorify God in doctrines," and 43:7: "every one that calleth upon my name, I have created him for my praise and my glory."

The apostles, then, are that ground which brought forth much fruit, as is said below in this chapter, verse 8: "and may be made my disciples"—through adherence and the fervor of charity. For these are the signs of discipleship to Christ, namely adherence to Christ; above, John 8:31: "if you continue in my word, you shall be my disciples indeed." And from this they are made fit to bear the fruit of doctrine. Second, the observance of charity; above, John 13:35: "by this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another," and so on. And from this they are made fit to bring forth the fruit of good works; 1 Corinthians 13:2: "if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge," etc., because there it is set down that without charity these are worth nothing.

Above, the Lord admonished his disciples to abide in him; here he shows what it is to abide in him, and this in three ways. First, that to abide in him is to abide in his love; second, he shows that to keep his commandments is to abide in his love, at the place, "if you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love"; third, he shows that the observance of charity is his commandment, at the place, "this is my commandment," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he recalls the benefit conferred on the disciples; second he exhorts them to persevere, at the place, "abide in my love."

He says therefore first, that this — namely, that we abide in Christ — is from his grace; and this grace is indeed the effect of his own love, Jeremiah 31:3: "I have loved you with an everlasting love." From which it is clear that all our good works are ours to us from the benefit of divine love. For they would not be ours, except because faith works through love; nor would we love, unless we were first loved. And therefore, recalling this benefit, he said, "as the Father has loved me, I also have loved you." But it should be noted that the word "as" sometimes denotes equality of nature, but sometimes a likeness of action. The Arians, however, erring, wanted the word "as" to import equality, and by this — as has often been expressed above — they concluded that he was less than the Father. But this is false; and therefore, according to Augustine, it must be said that the word "as" expresses a likeness of grace and of love: for the love with which the Son loves the disciples is a certain likeness of that love with which the Father loves the Son.

For since to love someone is to will good to him, the Father loves the Son according to the divine nature, insofar as he wills for him his own infinite good, which he himself has, by communicating to him the very same nature, numerically, which he himself has; above, John 5:20: "the Father loves the Son, and shows him all things which he himself does." He also loves him according to the human nature; Hosea 11:1: "Israel was a child, and I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son." And this, namely, so that he might be at once God and man. And to none of these did the Son love the disciples, for neither did he love them to this end, that they should be God by nature, nor that they should be united to God in person; but he loved them unto a certain likeness of these, namely, that they should be gods by participation in grace; Psalm 81:6: "I have said: you are gods"; 2 Peter 1:4: "through whom he has given us great and precious promises, that by these we may be made partakers of the divine nature." Likewise, that they should be taken up into a unity of affection: because "he who adheres to God is one spirit," 1 Corinthians 6:17. Romans 8:29: "whom he foreknew, to be made conformable to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." Thus, therefore, God the Father has set a greater good for the Son according to both natures than the Son has for the disciples, yet a similar one, as has been said.

"Abide in my love" — as if he were saying: since you have received so great a benefit from my love, abide in it, namely, that you may love me; or, "abide in my love," because I love you, namely, abide in my grace, that you may not fall away from the goods which I have prepared for you. And this exposition fits better, so that the sense is: that you persevere in this state, namely, that you be loved by me through the effect of grace; 1 Corinthians 7:20: "let every man abide in the calling in which he was called"; 1 John 4:16: "he who abides in charity, abides in God, and God in him."

Here he shows what it is to abide in his love, and first he shows that this is to keep his commandment; second he makes it clear by an example, at the place, "as I also have kept my Father's commandments"; third he excludes a doubt, at the place, "these things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you." He says therefore, "abide in my love," and this you will do if you keep my commandments: for thus you will abide in my love. For the observance of the commandments is an effect of divine love, not only of that love by which we love, but of that by which he himself loves us. For from the fact that he himself loves us, he moves us and helps us to fulfill his commandments, which cannot be fulfilled except through grace, 1 John 4:10: "in this is charity: not as though we had loved God, but because he first loved us."

He then adds an example for this, saying, "as I also have kept my Father's commandments." For just as the love with which the Father loves him is an example of the love with which he himself loves us, so he willed that his own obedience should be an example of our obedience. For Christ, by this, showed that he abode in the love of the Father, because in all things he kept his commandments. For he even endured death, Philippians 2:8: "he became obedient to the Father unto death, even the death of the cross." He abstained from every sin; 1 Peter 2:22: "who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth." These things are to be understood of Christ according as he is man; above, John 8:29: "he has not left me alone, because I always do the things that please him." And therefore he says: I abide in his love, because nothing in me, according as I am man, is contrary to his love.

Lest they believe that he admonishes them to keep his commandments for his own advantage, and not that of the disciples, he says, "these things I have spoken to you" — namely, that you may keep my commandments for your own good, namely, that my joy may be in you. For love is the cause of joy: for each one rejoices over the thing loved. Now God loves both himself and the creature, especially the rational creature, to whom he communicates an infinite good. Christ therefore rejoices from eternity over two things: namely, over his own good and that of the Father; Proverbs 8:30: "I was delighted before him, playing in the world." Likewise, over the good of the rational creature; the same, Proverbs 8:31: "my delights are to be with the children of men" — that is, in this, that I am communicated to the children of men; and over these things he rejoices from eternity; Isaiah 62:5: "your God shall rejoice over you." The Lord therefore wills that, through the observance of his commandments, we be made partakers of his joy; hence he says, "that my joy" — namely, that with which I rejoice over my divinity and that of the Father — "may be in you": which is nothing other than eternal life, which is joy concerning the truth, as Augustine says; as if he were saying: that you may have eternal life; Job 22:26: "then you shall abound with delights over the Almighty." "And your joy" — that is, the joy with which I rejoice over my humanity — "may be filled." For the goods over which we rejoice are either imperfect, or are had imperfectly; and therefore joy in this life cannot be full. But it will be full when we attain perfect goods perfectly; Matthew 25:21: "enter into the joy of your lord."

Here the Lord shows what his commandments are, and first he sets forth what his commandment is; second he brings in an example, at the place, "as I have loved you"; third he recalls a benefit, at the place, "you are my friends." Now the commandment which he sets down is the commandment of charity, which he wills to be kept. "This is," he says, "my commandment, that you love one another." But since there are many other commandments of the Lord in sacred discourse, it is asked why he says that the observance of charity alone is his commandment. To which, according to Gregory, it must be said that charity is the root and the end of all the virtues. Root indeed, because from charity confirmed in the heart of man, man is moved to fulfill all the other commandments; Romans 13:8: "he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law." Therefore all the commandments are ordered, as it were, to this — that man should do good to his neighbor, and not trouble him — which indeed is done chiefly out of charity. It is also the end, because all the commandments are ordered to it, and are made firm in charity alone; 1 Timothy 1:5: "the end of the commandment is charity." He says therefore, "this is my commandment, that you love one another," as if to say that from charity all things proceed as from a principle, and in charity all things are ordered as to an end. For, as Gregory says, just as many branches of a tree come forth from one root, so many virtues are generated from one root: nor does the branch of a good work have any greenness, if it does not abide in the root of charity.

But since it is said in Matthew 22:40 that on the love not only of God, but also of neighbor, the law and the prophets depend, why does he here make mention only of the love of neighbor? But it must be said that the one is included in the other: for he who loves God must of necessity love his neighbor and the things that are God's; and he who loves his neighbor for God's sake must of necessity love God — for although the objects are diverse, yet the acts themselves, by consequence, are one. There is, however, a twofold reason why he makes mention rather of the love of neighbor than of God. One, namely, because in this he intends to instruct them, and to lead them as to how they should edify their neighbors, and how they might become strong to bear the tribulations of persecutors; and for both of these the charity of neighbor is necessary.

Here he makes clear, by an example, how we ought to love our neighbor — namely, in the way that Christ loved us. Now Christ loved us in an ordered way and effectively. In an ordered way, indeed, because he loved nothing in us except God, and in order to him; Ecclesiasticus 24:24: "I am the mother of fair love," etc. Effectively, however, because he loved to such an extent that he handed himself over for us; Ephesians 5:2: "he loved us, and delivered himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for an odor of sweetness." We ought therefore to love our neighbors, namely, holily unto good, and effectively, namely, so that we show our love by deed; 1 John 3:18: "let us not love in word, nor in tongue, but in deed and in truth."

"Greater love than this no man has, than that a man lay down his life for his friends." Here he shows the effectiveness of love, which is that one should endure death for his friends, which is a sign of the greatest love. But against this it is objected, that a sign of greater love is said to be when someone lays down his life for his enemies, as Christ did; Romans 5:8: "God commends his charity toward us: because when as yet we were sinners, according to the appointed time, Christ died for us." To which it must be said that Christ did not lay down his life for us as enemies, in the sense that we should remain enemies, but that he might make us friends: or, although they were not friends as loving, they were nevertheless friends as being loved. It is, however, manifest that it is a sign of the greatest love to lay down one's life for one's friends, because, in the order of things to be loved, four are ordered: namely, God, our own soul, our neighbor, and our body. And we ought to love God above ourselves and above our neighbors, so that for God we ought to give up ourselves — namely soul and body — and our neighbor. But for our own soul we ought to lay down the body, yet not to give up the soul itself. But for our neighbor we ought to expose our bodily life and body for the neighbor's salvation: and therefore, since bodily life is the chief thing that we have after the soul, it is therefore the chief thing to expose it for our neighbor, and it is a sign of greater love; 1 John 4:9: "in this the charity of God appeared in us, because God sent his only-begotten Son into the world, that we may live by him."

Above, the Lord admonished us to brotherly love, and this by his own example; here he shows the disciples the benefit bestowed on them, by which they were obligated to the imitation of Christ: namely, that Christ took them up into his love. And first he sets down the sign of friendship; second he adds the cause, at "You have not chosen me" etc. Now he sets down a twofold sign of friendship: one on the part of the disciples; the other on his own part, at "Now I will not call you servants."

The sign on the part of the disciples, that they are friends of Christ, is the observance of his commandments; hence he says, "You are my friends, if you do what I command you"; as if he were saying: up to now I have admonished you to love one another, but now I admonish and speak concerning your friendship toward myself. Now this that he says, "You are my friends," can be understood in two ways, according as "friend" is said in two ways, namely one who loves and one who is loved; and according to both, it is true what he adds, "if you do what I command you." And those who love God keep his commandments; because since a friend is called, as it were, the guardian of the soul, as Gregory says, not undeservedly is he who guards the will of God in his precepts called his friend. Likewise, those whom God loves keep the commandments of God, inasmuch as, by conferring his grace upon them, he helps them to keep them: for God, by loving us, makes us his lovers; Proverbs 8:17: "I love those who love me" — not as though they had first been lovers, but because he himself, by loving, makes them lovers. But it must be known that the observance of the commandments is not the cause of the divine friendship, but its sign: namely both that God loves us, and that we love him; Wisdom 6:19: "the love of her is the keeping of her laws"; 1 John 2:4: "He who says that he loves God, and does not keep his commandments, is a liar."

Now on the part of Christ the sign of friendship is set down, when he says "Now I will not call you servants"; and first he excludes what seems contrary to friendship; second he sets down the sign of true friendship, at "but I have called you friends" etc. Now servitude is contrary to friendship, and therefore he first excludes servitude, saying "Now I will not call you servants"; as if he were saying: although formerly you were as it were servants under the law, now you are as it were free under grace; Romans 8:15: "You have not received the spirit of servitude again in fear, but you have received the spirit of the adoption of sons." Second he adds the reason, saying, "because the servant does not know what his lord does": for the servant is, as it were, a stranger to his lord; above, chapter 8:35: "the servant does not abide in the house forever." But secrets are not to be entrusted to strangers; Proverbs 25:9: "do not reveal your secret to a stranger," hence now secrets are not to be entrusted to servants.

Now this can be connected to what precedes in this way. The disciples might say that if we keep your precepts, we are your friends; but to keep precepts belongs more to servitude than to friendship: and therefore, excluding this, the Lord says, "Now I will not call you servants." But there is a doubt here. Since the apostles themselves call themselves servants of Christ; as: "Paul, an apostle, a servant of Christ Jesus," and David: "I am your servant," and even those who are to be brought into eternal life: Matthew 25:23: "Well done, good and faithful servant... enter into the joy of your lord": what is this, that the Lord says, "Now I will not call you servants"? There is doubt also about this: since lords frequently reveal their secrets to their servants, and God too, Amos 3:7: "God will not do a thing, unless he has revealed his secret to his servants the prophets": it does not seem true what he says here, "the servant does not know what his lord does."

I respond. It must be said, according to Augustine, that servitude is properly created out of fear. Now there is a twofold fear: namely servile fear, which charity casts out, 1 John 4:18: "fear is not in charity"; the other is filial fear, which is generated from charity, because one fears to lose what one loves; and this is a good and chaste fear, of which it is said in Psalm 18:10: "the fear of the Lord is holy, enduring forever." And according to this there are two servitudes. One which proceeds from filial fear; and according to this, all the just are servants, and sons of God, as was objected. The other servitude is that which proceeds from fear of punishment, and is contrary to love; and of this he says, "Now I will not call you servants."

It must also be known that a servant, properly speaking, is one who is not his own cause; but a free man is one who is the cause of himself. There is therefore a difference between the operations of a servant and of a free man: because the servant operates for the sake of another; but the free man operates for his own sake, both as regards the final cause of the work, and as regards the moving cause. For the free man operates for his own sake, as for an end, and operates from himself, because he is moved to the work by his own will; but the servant operates neither for his own sake but for his lord's, nor from himself but from the will of his lord, and as it were by a certain compulsion. But it sometimes happens that a servant operates for the sake of another, as for a final cause; yet he operates from himself, inasmuch as he moves himself to the work: and this is a good servitude, because he is moved by charity to do good works; but he does not operate for his own sake, because charity does not seek what is its own, but what belongs to Jesus Christ and to the salvation of neighbors. But those who operate entirely for the sake of another are bad servants. It is clear, therefore, that the disciples were servants, but with a good servitude, which proceeds from love.

To the second question it must be said that that servant who is moved only by another, and not from himself, stands to the one moving him as an instrument stands to a craftsman. But an instrument shares with the craftsman in the work, but not in the rationale of the work. So then such servants participate only in the work; but when a servant operates from his own will, it is necessary that he know the rationale of the work, and that the hidden things be revealed to him, by which he can know the things he does; Ecclesiasticus 33:31: "If you have a faithful servant, let him be to you as your own soul." Now the apostles, as has been said, were moved from themselves to do good works, namely from their own will inclined through love; and therefore the Lord reveals his secrets to them. But of bad servants it is true that they do not know what their lord does. But what are those things which they do not know? Properly those things which God does in us. For all the good things that we do, God works in us; Isaiah 26:12 and Philippians 2:13: "he works in us both to will and to accomplish." The bad servant therefore, darkened by the pride of his heart, while he attributes to himself what he does, does not know what his lord does.

Here he sets down the true sign of friendship on his own part, which is that "whatsoever I have heard from my Father, I have made known to you." For it is a true sign of friendship that a friend reveal the secrets of his heart to his friend. For since friends have one heart and one soul, a friend does not seem to place outside his own heart what he reveals to a friend; Proverbs 25:9: "Treat your cause with your friend." Now God, by making us participants of his wisdom, reveals his secrets to us; Wisdom 7:27: "through the nations she passes into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets."

But there is a doubt here first, what and how the Son hears from the Father. This indeed has already been made clear many times. For since to hear is to receive knowledge from another, for the Son to hear from the Father is nothing other than to receive knowledge from him; but the knowledge of the Son is his essence: therefore for the Son to hear from the Father is to receive his essence from him. There is doubt also about this, that he says, "all whatsoever I have heard from my Father, I have made known to you." If then he made all things known to them, it follows that the disciples knew as much as the Son.

Response. It must be said, according to Chrysostom, "all whatsoever I have heard" — namely, all that it was fitting for you to hear — "I have made known to you"; but not absolutely all things; below, 16:12: "I have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." Or it must be said, according to Augustine, that the Lord, on account of the certainty of the things to be said, uses the past tense for the future; so that the sense is: "all whatsoever I have heard from my Father, I have made known to you," that is, I will make known, in the fullness of which the Apostle speaks, 1 Corinthians 13:12: "then I shall know even as I am known"; below, 16:25: "in that day I will declare to you plainly of my Father," namely when he will bring us in to the vision of the Father. For all things that the Son knows, the Father knows. Therefore when he will reveal the Father to us, he will reveal all that he knows, and that which we know.

Or it must be said, according to Gregory, and better. Of the same thing there can be had both perfect and imperfect knowledge: as appears in the sciences, that he who knows all the principles of one science is said to know that science, but he knows it imperfectly. Hence one who teaches some principles of a certain science can say that he has taught that science, because all the things that belong to that science are virtually contained in its principles; but he knows that same science more perfectly when he knows the individual conclusions, which were virtually in the principles. So then, of the things of God too there can be had a twofold knowledge. One imperfect: and this is had through faith, which is a foretaste of that future beatitude and knowledge which we shall have in our homeland; Hebrews 11:1: "Now faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things that do not appear." Hence of this knowledge he says, "I have made all things known to you," namely in faith, according to a certain foretaste, just as conclusions are virtually in their principles. Hence Gregory says: "all the things that he makes known to his servants are the joys of interior charity and the festivals of the heavenly homeland, which he daily imprints on our minds through the breathing-in of his love; for while we love the heavenly things we have heard, we already know the things we love, because love itself is knowledge."

Here he sets down the cause of friendship. Now it is customary among men that each one attribute to himself the cause of friendship; Ecclesiasticus 37:1: "Every friend says: I too have joined in friendship." And so many attribute to themselves the cause of the divine friendship, while they attribute to themselves the beginning of good works, and not to God. And the Lord, excluding this, says, "You have not chosen me"; as if he were saying: whoever has been called to this dignity of friendship should not attribute to himself the cause of the friendship, but to me, who chose him for this. And first he sets down the gratuitous election of God; second he explains for what they are chosen, at "and I have appointed you, that you should go and bring forth fruit."

He says therefore, "you have not chosen me," namely that I should be your friend, "but I have chosen you," that I might make you my friends; 1 John 4:10: "not as though we had loved God, but because he first loved us." Now there is a twofold love of God. One eternal, by which we are predestined; Ephesians 1:4: "he chose us in him before the foundation of the world." The other temporal, by which we are called by him, which is nothing other than the execution of eternal predestination: because those whom he chose by predestining, these he also chose by calling; Romans 8:30: "whom he predestined, these he also called," etc.; Luke 6:13: "he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles."

Now there are some who say that the temporal election of God is caused by the merits of the elect. But this is contrary to what is said here. For if he chose you for this reason, that you were good, yet you could not be good unless you chose the good; but this good is above all God; therefore you would have chosen the good, which is God, before you were chosen. But the Lord says the contrary, "you have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." It must not therefore be said that any good on our part totally precedes the election of God. But I say "totally," because some particular good existing in us can be the cause of another good being given to us, and this of another, since there is a certain order among the divine gifts; but universally nothing can be a cause of, and precede, the divine election: because all goods come to us from God.

But concerning the eternal election it would be even more erroneous to say that it was preceded by any choice of ours. There were nevertheless some who said that our preceding merits are the cause of that election: and this was the error of Origen, who said that the souls of men were created together, equal, and that while some remained standing, some sinned less and some sinned more; and therefore some merited to have grace, some did not. But against this is what the Lord says: "you have not chosen me." But others say that it is true that merits existing in act are not the cause of predestination, but merits pre-existing in the foreknowledge of God; saying that because God knew that some would be good in the future and would use grace well, therefore he purposed that he would give them grace. But if this were so, it would follow that he chose us for this reason, that he foreknew that we would choose him. And thus our election would be prior to the divine election, which is against the sentence of the Lord.

But perhaps someone would say: what election could there be, since we were nothing, and there was no pre-eminence among us? But the manner of human election deceives him who says such things, according to which he believes the divine election to be. But they stand differently in each case: because our election is caused by a good already pre-existing; but the divine election is the cause of the influx of a greater good in one than in another. For since election is an act of the will, according as the will of God and the will of man stand differently in relation to goods, so is the manner of their election different. Now the will of God stands to created good as its cause; Wisdom 11:26: "how could those things have existed, if you had not willed it?" And thus the good is derived to created things from the will of God. Hence God prefers one to another, insofar as he pours more of the good into him than into the other. But the will of man is moved to something from a pre-existing good that is apprehended: and therefore in our election it is necessary that one good pre-exist another.

Now God pours the good into one more than into another for this reason, that order may shine forth in things: as appears in material things, that prime matter, as far as it is of itself, is uniformly disposed to all forms. Things themselves also, before they exist, are not disposed to this or that being; but in order that order may be preserved among them, they receive diverse forms and diverse being from God. And likewise in the rational creature some are chosen unto glory, some are reprobated unto punishment; 2 Timothy 2:19: "the Lord knows who are his"; "for in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth: and some indeed unto honor, but some unto dishonor." And thus a diverse order appears: while in some things the mercy of God shines forth, whom without any preceding merits he prepares for grace; but in others the justice of God, while on account of their own faults, yet short of what is fully deserved, he allots them to punishment. So then, "I have chosen you," from eternity by predestining, and by calling to the faith in time.

Now for what he chose them, he subjoins next, when he says, "and I have appointed you, that you should go and bring forth fruit"; and first he sets down for what he chose them; second he assigns the reason for what has been said, at "these things I command you, that you love one another." Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows that he chose them to do something; second, that he chose them to receive something, at "that whatsoever you shall ask the Father in my name, he may give you."

He says therefore, "I have appointed you," that is, I have given you an order in my Church; 1 Corinthians 12:28: "God has appointed in the Church, first indeed apostles," etc. Likewise "I have appointed you," that is, I have firmly established you; Genesis 1:16: "God made the great lights, and set them in the firmament of heaven"; Judges 5:20: "the stars, remaining in their order and course, fought against Sisera." For "appointing" implies order and firmness. "I have appointed you," I say, unto three things. First indeed to go: hence he says, "that you should go," running through the world, that you might convert the whole to the faith; Mark, last chapter, 15: "going into the whole world, preach the Gospel to every creature." Or "that you should go," that is, that you should advance from virtue to virtue; Psalm 83:8: "they shall go from virtue to virtue: the God of gods shall be seen in Sion"; Hosea, last chapter, 6: "his branches shall go forth like Lebanon."

Second, to bring forth fruit, hence he says "and bring forth fruit," namely of the conversion of the faithful, as regards the first journey; Romans 1:13: "that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among the other Gentiles." Or the interior spiritual fruit, as regards the second journey; Galatians 5:22: "but the fruit of the Spirit is charity, joy, peace," etc.; Ecclesiasticus 24:23: "my flowers are the fruit of honor and of virtue." Third, that they should bring forth fruit which is not lost through death or sin; hence he says, "and your fruit should remain," namely that the congregation of the faithful should be brought through to eternal life, and that the spiritual fruit should advance the more; above, 4:36: "and gathers fruit unto eternal life."

"That whatsoever you shall ask." Here he shows that he chose them to receive something, namely all that they should ask. As if he were saying: I have appointed you to this end, that you might be worthy to receive from the Father in my name; 1 John 3:21: "if our heart does not reprove us, we have confidence toward God, and whatsoever we shall ask, we shall receive from him."

"These things I command you." Here he assigns the reason for the things he has said. For someone might say, why Christ should say all these things to them. Hence the Lord, answering, says, "these things I command you, that you love one another"; as if to say, all that I say is inducing you toward the love of your neighbors; 1 Timothy 1:5: "the end of the commandment is charity." Or it must be said, according to Chrysostom, that the disciples might say: Lord, why do you recall to us so many things about your love? Is it perhaps to reproach us? But the Lord says: no, rather that I might incite you to the love of your neighbor; 1 John 4:21: "this commandment we have from God, that he who loves God, should also love his brother."

Having set forth the similitude of the vine and the branches, and having explained it as regards the adherence of the branches to the vine, here he consequently explains it as regards their purgation, which is to come about through tribulations. The Lord therefore consoles them against the tribulations which they were to suffer, and first he sets forth the reasons from which he consoles them; second, he expounds these reasons themselves, at the point "Remember my word," etc.; third, he excludes the excuses of the persecutors, at the point "If I had not come, and had not spoken to them, they would not have sin." Now he sets forth two reasons for their consolation, of which one is taken from example; the second from cause, at the point "If you had been of the world," etc.

The Lord therefore consoles them by his own example, for he too suffered the persecutions of tyrants; hence he says, "If the world hates you, know that it hated me before you." For it must be known that, just as the principle of all benefits is love, so also the principle of all persecutions is hatred; and therefore the Lord foretells to them the hatred to come; Matthew 24:9: "You will be hated by all men"; Luke 6:22: "Blessed shall you be when men hate you," etc. He says therefore: "If the world hates you," that is, it will come to pass that the world will hold you in hatred, and it will manifest its hatred by persecuting you; "know that it hated me before you"; above, John 7:7: "The world cannot hate you; but me it hates." But this is a great consolation to the just for bravely enduring persecutions; Hebrews 12:3: "Think diligently upon him who endured such contradiction from sinners against himself, that you be not wearied, fainting in your minds"; 1 Peter 2:21: "Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example, that you should follow his steps." And therefore, according to Augustine, the members ought not to raise themselves above the head, nor refuse to be in the body, by being unwilling to endure the world's hatred along with the head.

Now "world" is taken in two ways. Sometimes indeed in a good sense, for those who live well in the world; 2 Corinthians 5:19: "God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself." And sometimes in a bad sense, namely for the lovers of the world; 1 John 5:19: "The whole world is set in wickedness." Thus therefore the whole world hates the whole world: for the lovers of the world, who are spread throughout the whole world, hate the whole world, that is, the Church of the good strengthened throughout the whole world.

"If you had been of the world" — here is set forth the second reason, taken from the cause of the hatred. For when someone endures another's hatred on account of his own fault, it is a matter for grief and sorrow; but when on account of virtue, it is a matter for rejoicing. First therefore he shows what is the cause why some are loved by the world; second he shows why the apostles are held in hatred by the world, at the point "but because you are not of the world... therefore the world hates you." Now the cause why some are loved is their likeness to the world; hence he says, "If you had been of the world, the world would love its own." Every like thing loves its like; Ecclesiasticus 13:20: "All flesh will be joined to its like." And therefore the world, that is, the lovers of the world, love the lovers of the world; hence he says, "if you had been of the world," that is, following the world, "the world would love its own," as its own and as like to itself; above, John 7:7: "The world cannot hate you; but me it hates"; 1 John 4:5: "They are of the world: therefore they speak of the world, and the world hears them."

But against this: by "world" the Lord here means the princes of the world, who were going to persecute the apostles; but these same princes persecute certain men of the world when they are found out, for instance murderers and robbers: therefore the world does not love its own, just as it does not love the apostles.

I respond. It must be said that something purely good can be found, but nothing purely evil is found, since the subject of evil is a good. The evil of fault, therefore, is founded upon the good of nature. Hence no man can be a sinner and evil without having something of good. Thus therefore, according to the evil which they have, namely unbelief, they belong to the world, and hate the apostles and those who are not of the world; but according to the good which they have, they are not of the world, and they hold in hatred those who are of the world, namely thieves and robbers, and other such. There were nevertheless some living well in the world, who loved the apostles, approving their deeds.

But still it seems to be more doubtful: for every sin belongs to the world, and thus according to any sin whatsoever someone is of the world. But we see that some men who agree in some sin nevertheless hold one another in hatred, as the proud; Proverbs 13:10: "Among the proud there are always contentions"; and the covetous man hates the covetous man. Hence, according to the Philosopher, potters quarrel with one another. The world therefore hates the world. It does not therefore seem to be true what the Lord says, "the world would love its own."

Response. It must be said that love is twofold: namely of friendship and of concupiscence, and they differ: because in the love of concupiscence, we draw to ourselves those things which are extrinsic to us, since by that very love we love other things insofar as they are useful or delightful to us; but in the love of friendship it is the reverse, because we draw ourselves to those things which are outside us; for toward those whom we love with this love, we hold ourselves as toward ourselves, communicating ourselves to them in a certain way. Hence in the love of friendship, likeness is the cause of love, for we do not love someone in this way except insofar as we are one with him; and likeness is a certain unity. But in the love of concupiscence, whether it be useful or delightful, likeness is the cause of separation and hatred. For when by this love I love someone insofar as he is useful or delightful to me, whatever is an impediment to my utility or delight, I hold in hatred as a contrary. And hence it is that the proud quarrel with one another, insofar as one usurps for himself the glory which another loves and in which he delights; potters too, insofar as one draws to himself the profit which another wanted for himself. But it must be known that the love of concupiscence is not of the thing desired, but of the one desiring: for on this account someone loves another with this love, insofar as he is useful to him, as has been said. And therefore in this he loves himself more than the other: just as one who loves wine because it is delightful to him loves himself rather than the wine. But the love of friendship belongs rather to the thing loved than to the one loving, because he loves someone on account of the beloved himself, not on account of the one loving himself. Thus therefore, because in the love of friendship likeness is the cause of love, and unlikeness the cause of hatred, hence it is that the world holds in hatred what is not its own and is unlike itself, and loves — that is, with the love of friendship — what is its own. But with regard to the love of concupiscence it is the reverse. And therefore he says, "if you had been of the world, the world would love its own," namely with the love of friendship.

Here he sets forth the cause why the apostles are held in hatred by the world, which is unlikeness. He says therefore, "but because you are not of the world" — namely by the elevation of mind, although you are by origin; above, John 8:23: "You are from below: but I am from above." And this indeed, because you have been raised up from the world, not of yourselves, but by my grace, namely because I have chosen you out of the world; above, in the same place: "I have chosen you"; "therefore," namely because you are not of the world, "the world hates you," that is, the lovers of the world, as being unlike them: Proverbs 29:27: "The just abhor the wicked, and the wicked abhor those who are in the right way." And in the same place, verse 10: "Bloodthirsty men hate," etc.

Now a threefold reason can be assigned why the world hates the saints. The first is diversity of condition: because namely the world is in death, but the saints are in a state of life; 1 John 3:13: "Do not wonder, brothers, if the world hates you. We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren." And therefore it says in Wisdom 2:15: "He is grievous to us, even to behold." The second reason is displeasure at correction. For holy men, both in words and in deeds, rebuke the deeds of the world; and therefore the world hates them; Amos 5:10: "They have hated him that rebuketh in the gate"; above, John 7:7: "But me it hates," namely the world, "because I bear witness of it, that its works are evil." The third reason is the iniquity of rivalry, by which the wicked envy just men, when they see them growing and multiplying in goodness and holiness; just as the Egyptians, seeing the sons of Israel growing, held them in hatred and persecuted them, Exodus 1:9 and following; and in Genesis 37:4 it is said that Joseph's brothers, seeing that he was more loved by all, hated him.

Here he explains the aforesaid reasons, and first the first, which pertains to the example; second the second, which pertains to the cause of hatred, at the point "But all these things they will do to you for my name's sake." Concerning the first he does two things. First he calls to mind the diversity of his own rank in relation to the disciples; second he shows the likeness of the deeds done, at the point "If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you." The diversity of rank of Christ in relation to the disciples was this, that he himself was the Lord, while they were servants; hence above, John 13:16, he says: "The servant is not greater than his lord." This diversity, therefore, he calls to mind, saying: "Remember my word which I said to you," above, John 13:16, namely, that the servant is not greater than his lord. Therefore it ought not to be unworthy in your eyes, if you suffer the things which your lord has suffered; rather you ought to reckon this to yourselves as a great glory. Hence in Matthew 20:22, when the disciples asked to sit one at his right hand and the other at his left, he said: "Can you drink the cup that I shall drink?" Ecclesiasticus 23:38: "It is a great glory to follow the Lord"; Matthew 10:25: "It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master."

But against this: above, in the same place, he said, "I will now not call you servants," but here: "the servant is not greater than his lord." I respond that it must be said that servitude is twofold. One proceeding from servile fear, namely of punishment: and according to this the apostles were not servants; the other from chaste fear, and such was the servitude in the apostles; Luke 12:37: "Blessed are those servants whom the lord, when he comes, shall find watching." If therefore you are servants, and I am lord, you ought to be content that the same things be done to you which were done to me. Now some despised me, and some received me; above, John 1:11: "He came unto his own, and his own did not receive him: but as many as received him, he gave them power to become sons of God"; and you likewise, if some will despise you, some nevertheless will honor you.

Hence he says, "If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you" — where the likeness of the holy ones is set forth, because the same is the reason of the persecution which they exercised against the disciples and against Christ, since in persecuting the disciples they were persecuting Christ; Acts 9:4, in the persecution of the disciples Christ said that he himself was being persecuted: "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" And therefore, on account of the identity of the cause, the consequence follows: "If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you"; Matthew 10:25: "If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more them of his household?" Concerning this persecution it is said in Matthew 23:34: "Behold, I send to you wise men and scribes, and some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city." And likewise the same is the reason of the honoring; and therefore he says, "If they have kept my word, they will keep yours also": because your words are my words; 2 Corinthians, last chapter, 3: "Do you seek a proof of him who speaks in me, Christ?" Matthew 10:20: "For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you"; and therefore in Luke 10:16 it says: "He who hears you, hears me." But that the apostles were received by some, and honored, is clear from 1 Thessalonians 2:13: "And you, when you had received from us the word of the hearing of God, received it not as the word of men, but, as it is truly, the word of God."

Here he explains the reason for consolation, which is taken from the cause of the hatred. For the apostles had been chosen and raised up above the world, inasmuch as they had been made participants of the divinity, and joined to God, and therefore the world held them in hatred: from which it follows that the world hated God in them rather than them themselves. And the cause of this hatred was that they did not have true knowledge of God, namely through true faith and devout love: otherwise, if they had known them to be friends of God, they would not have persecuted them. And therefore he says, "all these things" — namely that they hate and persecute you — "they will do to you for my name's sake," and therefore it ought to be glorious for you; 1 Peter 4:15-16: "Let none of us suffer as a thief, or a murderer, or a railer, or a coveter of other men's things; but if as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God in that name." But "for my name" does not mean as if they loved it, but because they hold it in hatred. Just as, on the contrary, you will suffer for my name because you love it. And they will do these things, "because they do not know him who sent me"; above, John 8:19: "If you knew me, you would also surely know my Father." For they did not know that it was acceptable to God that they should adhere to Christ. But it must be noted that here he speaks of perfect knowledge, which consists in a faith perfecting the intellect and joining the affection to God: concerning which knowledge it is said in Jeremiah 9:24: "In this let him glory that glorieth, to know and to understand me"; Wisdom 15:3: "To know thee is consummated understanding," etc.

Above, the Lord, treating of the persecution which was to come upon the disciples from the Jews, assigned the reason: because they do not know him who sent him. But because ignorance is wont to excuse, therefore here he shows them to be inexcusable; and this in two ways. First, through the things which he himself personally did and taught concerning them; second, through the things which were to come in his absence, at the place "But when the Paraclete shall come," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows them to be inexcusable on account of the teaching of the truth; second, on account of the evidence of signs, at the place "If I had not done the works." Concerning the first he does three things. First he shows what could avail them for excuse; second he shows that they lack this support, at the place "but now they have no excuse for their sin"; third he shows from what root their persecution proceeds, at the place "he who hates me, hates my Father also."

He says therefore that "they will do all these things to you on account of my name"; and indeed they could be excused of these things if he had not come and had not spoken to them; that is, if he had not shown himself personally, and had not personally taught them, "they would not have sin." But against this: Romans 3:23, "all have sinned and need the grace of God." But it must be said that the Lord is not speaking here of just any sin, but of the sin of unbelief, namely that they do not believe in Christ: which is called "sin" by antonomasia, because while this sin exists, no other sin can be remitted, since no sin is remitted except through faith in Jesus Christ, through whom is justice, as is said in Romans 5:1. And therefore it is the same as what he says, "they would not have sin," as if he were saying: it would not be imputed to them that they do not believe in me. And this, first, because "faith is from hearing," Romans 10:17. Hence if he had not come and had not spoken to them, they could not have believed. But it is not imputed to anyone as sin if he does not do what he is in no way able to do.

And if it be said that they were bound, and could believe, even if Christ had not come, since it had been announced to them through the prophets — Romans 1:2, "which he had promised before through his prophets in the holy Scriptures concerning his Son," etc. — it must be answered that the Jews could not, of themselves, believe and understand even the very words of the prophets, unless they were shown to them by divine help; Daniel 12:9, "the words are closed up and sealed until the time." Hence in Acts 8:31 the eunuch said: "How can I understand, unless someone show me?" Thus, then, if Christ had not come, they would not have this sin, namely of unbelief, although they would have had other actual sins on account of which they would have been punished. And the same reasoning holds for all those to whom the preaching of the word of God could not reach. Hence the sin of unbelief is not imputed to them unto condemnation; but, deprived of the benefit of God on account of their other actual and original sins, they will be damned.

But it must be known that for many the coming and teaching of Christ turned to good, namely for those who received him and kept his word; and for many to evil, namely for those who would neither hear him nor believe him; Isaiah 8:14, "he shall be for a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense to the two houses of Israel; for a snare and a ruin to the inhabitants of Jerusalem"; Luke 2:34, "this child is set for the ruin and for the resurrection of many." Thus, then, he has set forth by what means they could be excused of unbelief. But they lack this support of excuse, because Christ both showed himself to them personally and taught them. Hence he says "but now" — that is, since I have come and have spoken — "they have no excuse," namely by reason of ignorance, "for their sin"; Romans 1:20, "so that they are inexcusable: because, when they knew God, they did not glorify him as God." But that they themselves knew Christ is clear from Matthew 12:7: "This is the heir; come, let us kill him." But they knew him to be the Christ promised in the law, but not to be God: for if they had known this, "they would never have crucified the Lord of glory."

Therefore ignorance does not avail them for excuse: because they did not do this out of ignorance, but from another root, namely from hatred and deliberate malice. Hence he adds "he who hates me, hates my Father also," as if to say: not ignorance, but the hatred which they had toward me, is unto sin for them, and this, because it overflows into hatred of the Father. For since the Son and the Father are one in essence, truth, and goodness, and all knowledge of anyone is through the truth which is in him, whoever loves the Son, loves the Father also; and whoever knows the one, knows the other also; and he who hates the Son hates the Father also.

But here there is a twofold question. The first, whether anyone can hold God in hatred. To which it must be said that no one can hold God in hatred insofar as he is God. Since God is the pure essence of goodness, which, since it is lovable in itself, it is impossible that it be hated by anyone in itself. Hence this is the reason why it is impossible for an evil man to see God. For it is impossible for God to be seen by anyone without being loved; but he who loves God is good; hence these are incompatible, namely that someone should see God and be evil. Yet someone can hold God in hatred with respect to something else — for instance, he who loves pleasure hates God as forbidding the enjoyment of pleasures, and he who seeks impunity hates the justice of God as punishing.

The second question is this: because no one can hate what he does not know; but the Jews were ignorant of the Father — above, in the same place, "they do not know him who sent me" — therefore what he says, "and hates my Father also," does not seem to be true. But it must be said, according to Augustine, that someone can love or hate a thing which he has never seen, nor knows according to the truth, but through rumor speaking well or ill of it. But this can happen in two ways. In one way, that it be hated or loved according to its very person, or according to what is told about it; as if I hear that someone is a thief, I hate him, not because I know or hate his very person, but because I commonly hate every thief: hence if he were a thief, and I did not know him to be a thief, I would hold him in hatred, and yet I would not know that I hated him. But the Jews held in hatred Christ, and the truth which he preached. Hence, since the very truth which Christ preached was in the will of God the Father, as were the works which Christ did, in like manner as they hated Christ, they held the Father in hatred, although they themselves did not know that those things were in the will of the Father.

Here he shows them to be inexcusable through the evidence of signs. For they could say that they are not convicted by the words which he speaks against them; and therefore he confirms his words with marvelous deeds, saying: "If I had not done among them the works which no other man has done, they would not have sin." First he shows that they could be excusable to some extent; second he shows the root of their sin; third he adduces an authority. He does the second at the place "but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father"; the third, at the place "that the word may be fulfilled which is written in their law."

Concerning the first, a twofold question is raised. One, which concerns the truth of the antecedent, namely "if I had not done the works which no other man has done," etc.: and it is asked whether Christ did among them any good works which no one else had done. And it seems that not: for if it be said that Christ raised the dead, this both Elijah and Elisha also did. If Christ walked upon the sea, Moses divided the sea. But Joshua did what is greater, namely, made the sun stand still. Unfittingly, therefore, Christ seems to reprove them, nor does the consequence seem to hold true.

I respond. It must be said, according to Augustine, that the Lord is not speaking here of any miracles whatsoever done "among them," that is, in their sight, but of works done "in them," that is, in their persons. For in the curing of the sick no one did as much in them as Christ did — although also in other respects likewise, since no other man was made God, and no one was born of a virgin except Christ. He did, then, in them works which no one else did in the curing of the sick; and this in three respects. First, indeed, in magnitude: because he raised a man dead four days, he gave sight to one born blind, "which has not been heard of from all ages," as is said above, John 9:32. Second, in multitude: because he healed all, however many, who were sick, as is said in Matthew 14:35 and following, which no one else did. Third, in manner: because others acted by invoking, showing that they did not act by their own power; but Christ acted by commanding, because by his own power; Mark 1:27, "What is this new doctrine? For with authority and power he commands even the unclean spirits, and they obey him." Thus, then, although others raised the dead and did other miraculous things which Christ did, yet not in that manner, nor by their own power, as Christ did. Likewise, what is said of the standing still of the sun is less than the fact that Christ, in dying, made the moon go backward, and changed the whole course of the firmament, as Dionysius says.

The second question concerns the truth of the conditional, namely whether, if Christ had not done in them the works which no one else did, they would be immune from the sin of unbelief. Response. It must be said: if we speak of any miracles whatsoever, they would have an excuse, if these had not been done in them by Christ. For no one can come to Christ through faith unless drawn; above, John 6:44, "No one can come to me, unless the Father, who sent me, draw him." And therefore in Song of Songs 1:3 the bride says: "Draw me after you: we will run in the odor of your ointments." Hence if there were no one who had drawn them to faith, they would be excusable of unbelief.

But it must be noted that Christ drew them by word, by visible and invisible signs, namely by moving and instigating hearts within; Proverbs 21:1, "the heart of kings is in the hand of God." The interior instinct to act well is therefore a work of God, and those who resist it sin: otherwise Stephen would have said in vain, Acts 7:5, "You have always resisted the Holy Spirit." And Isaiah 50:5, "The Lord has opened my ear" — that is, of the heart — "and I do not contradict." This, therefore, which the Lord says, "if I had not done among them the works which no other man has done," is to be understood not only of visible works, but also of the interior instinct and the drawing of teaching: which indeed, if he had not done in them, they would not have sin. Thus, then, it is clear how they could be excused, namely by this: if he had not done miraculous works in them.

Here he shows from what root they would incur the sin of unbelief: namely from hatred, on account of which, though the works were seen, they did not believe. Hence he says "but now they have seen" — namely the works which he did in them — "and have hated both me and my Father"; Proverbs 1:29, "because they held discipline hateful, and did not receive the fear of the Lord." And, as Gregory says, there are not a few in the Church who not only do not do good things, but even persecute them, and detest in others even the things which they themselves neglect to do: hence the sin of such people is perpetrated not from weakness or ignorance, but from deliberate intent alone.

Because they could say: if it is so that the Jews hated you and your Father, why do you work miracles among them? Therefore, responding, he says that he does this "that the word may be fulfilled which is written in their law." But here a difficulty is raised on this point: that although it is written in the Psalms, he says that it is written in their law. To which it must be said that "law" is taken in Scripture in three ways. For sometimes commonly for the whole Old Testament; and thus it is taken here, because the whole teaching of the Old Testament is ordered to the observance of the law; Luke 23:42, "Remember me," etc. Sometimes it is taken as it is divided over against the Hagiographa and the Prophets; Luke, last chapter, 44, "it is necessary that all things be fulfilled which are written in the prophets, and the law" — namely, of Moses — "and the Psalms"; under which the Hagiographa are also numbered. But sometimes "law" is taken as it is divided only over against the Prophets; and then the Hagiographa are numbered with the Prophets.

He says, then, "that the word may be fulfilled which is written in their law" (that is, in Psalm 34:19), "that they hated me without cause"; that is, not for the sake of obtaining some advantage, or avoiding some disadvantage — for it is on account of these that a man hates certain things, which were not the case in Christ; rather he gave them occasion for love, healing and teaching them; Acts 10:38, "he went about doing good"; Jeremiah 18:20, "Shall evil be rendered for good, that they have dug a pit for my soul?" The same, Jeremiah 2:5, "What iniquity have your fathers found in me, that they have gone far from me?"

Here he shows that they are not excusable on account of the things that were to come after him, because they were to have other testimonies, namely of the Holy Spirit, and also of the apostles; and first he sets forth what was to come on the part of the Holy Spirit; second, what was to come on the part of the apostles, at the place "and you also shall bear witness," etc. As regards the Holy Spirit he touches on four things. First, indeed, freedom; second, sweetness; third, procession; fourth, operation.

Freedom, indeed, or power, when he says "when the Paraclete shall come," etc. For he is properly said to "come" who goes of his own accord and by his own authority; and this befits the Holy Spirit, who "breathes where he wills," above, John 3:8. Wisdom 7:7, "I called upon him, and the spirit of wisdom came upon me." This, then, which he says, "I will send," does not designate coercion, but origin.

He touches on sweetness when he says "Paraclete," that is, comforter. For since he is the love of God, he makes us despise earthly things, and cleave to God; hence he excludes sorrow and sadness from us, and ministers joy concerning things divine; Galatians 5:22, "the fruit of the Spirit is charity, joy, peace," etc.; Acts 9:31, "the Church was filled with the consolation of the Holy Spirit," etc.

Third, he sets forth a twofold procession of the Holy Spirit. First, indeed, the temporal, when he says "whom I will send you from the Father," etc. Where it must be known that the Holy Spirit is said to be sent, not as though changing place, since he himself fills the whole world, as is said in Wisdom 1:7, but because in a new way, through grace, he begins to dwell in those whom he makes the temple of God; 1 Corinthians 3:15, "you are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God will dwell in you." Nor is it contrary that the Holy Spirit is said to be both sent and to come: for in this, that he is said to come, the majesty of his own divinity manifestly appears, "who works as he wills," 1 Corinthians 12:6. But he is said to be "sent" in order that his procession from another be shown: for that he sanctifies the rational creature by indwelling it, he has from another, from whom he has that he is, just as the Son has from another whatever he operates.

It must also be noted that the mission of the Holy Spirit is commonly from the Father and the Son: which is signified in Revelation, last chapter, 1, "he showed me a river of water of life" — that is, the Holy Spirit — "proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb" — that is, of Christ. Therefore, concerning the mission of the Holy Spirit, he makes mention of the Father and the Son, by whom he is sent with equal and the same power. And therefore sometimes he introduces the Father as sending, yet not without the Son; as above, John 14:26, "But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name." But sometimes he introduces himself as sending, not without the Father, as here when he says "whom I will send you from the Father," because, namely, the Son has from the Father whatever he does; above, John 5:19, "the Son cannot do anything of himself."

Second, he sets forth the eternal procession, where likewise he shows the Holy Spirit to pertain to the Son, when he says "the Spirit of truth" — for he himself is the truth; above, John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life" — and to pertain to the Father, when he says "who proceeds from the Father." Thus, then, what he says, "the Spirit of truth," is the same as if he said "the Spirit of the Son"; Galatians 4:6, "God has sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts." And because this name "spirit" imports a certain impulsion, and every motion has an effect suited to its principle, just as heating produces something hot, it follows that the Holy Spirit makes those into whom he is sent similar to him whose spirit he is; and therefore, since he is the Spirit of truth, "he teaches all truth," as is said below, John 16:13; and Job 32:8, "the inspiration of the Almighty gives understanding." And likewise, because he is the Spirit of the Son, he makes sons; Romans 8:15, "you have received the spirit of adoption of sons." But he says "the Spirit of truth" to distinguish it from the spirit of lying; Isaiah 19:14, "the Lord has mingled in the midst of Egypt the spirit of error"; 3 Kings, last chapter, 22, "I will go out, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets."

But because he says "who proceeds from the Father" and does not add "from the Father and the Son," the Greeks say that the Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Son, but only from the Father; which cannot be the case at all. For the Holy Spirit could not be distinguished from the Son unless either he himself proceeds from the Son, or conversely the Son from him; which no one says. For it cannot be said that in the divine persons, which are altogether immaterial and simple, there is a material distinction, which is according to a division of quantity, under which matter underlies. Hence it is necessary that the distinction of the divine persons be after the manner of a formal distinction, which must be according to some opposition. For whatever forms are not opposed are compatible with one another in the same subject, and do not diversify the supposit, as white and large. Hence in the divine persons, because "innascibility" and paternity are not opposed, they pertain to one person.

If, therefore, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct persons proceeding from the Father, it is necessary that they be distinguished by certain opposed properties: not, however, opposed according to affirmation and negation, or according to privation and possession, because in that case the Son and the Holy Spirit would stand to one another as being and non-being, and as the perfect and the deprived, which is repugnant to their equality; nor even according to the opposition of contraries, of which one is more perfect than the other. Hence it remains that the Holy Spirit is distinguished from the Son only by relative opposition. But this opposition can only exist from the fact that one of them is referred to the other. For diverse relations of two things to some third thing are not directly opposed to one another, except perhaps consequently, by accident. Hence it remains that, in order for the Holy Spirit to be distinguished from the Son, opposed relations must be attributed to them, by which they are opposed to one another. Nor can any others be found except relations of origin, according as one is from the other. Therefore, granted the Trinity of persons, it is impossible that the Holy Spirit not be from the Son.

But some say that the Holy Spirit and the Son are distinguished according to a difference of processions, inasmuch as the Son is from the Father by being born, and the Holy Spirit by proceeding. But the same question still returns, which arises from the aforesaid opinion, as to how these two processions differ. For it cannot be said that they are distinguished through different things received through generation, as the generation of a man and of a horse differ according to the different natures communicated. For the Son receives the same divine nature from the Father by being born, and the Holy Spirit by proceeding. Hence it remains that they are distinguished only according to the order of origin, inasmuch, namely, as the nativity of the Son is the principle of the procession of the Holy Spirit. Hence if the Holy Spirit were not from the Son, he would not be distinguished from the Son, nor would procession be distinguished from nativity.

Hence even the Greeks confess a certain order of the Son and the Holy Spirit. For they say that the Holy Spirit is of the Son, and that the Son works through the Holy Spirit; but not the reverse. And some even grant that the Holy Spirit is from the Son, yet they are unwilling to grant that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. But in this they are manifestly obstinate. For we use the word "procession" for all things which are in any way from another. And therefore this word, by reason of its commonality, is fitted to signify the existence of the Holy Spirit from the Son, which has no example among creatures from which some proper name of its own could be assumed, as the name "generation" is taken for the Son. For among creatures there is not found any person proceeding after the manner of will, as love, in the way that there is found some person proceeding after the manner of nature, as a son. And therefore, in whatever way the Holy Spirit has an order to the Son, it can be concluded that he proceeds from him.

Yet some of the Greeks say that it must not be said that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son, because this preposition "from" or "ab," among them, designates a principle not from a principle, which befits the Father alone. But this is not compelling: because the Son together with the Father is one principle of the Holy Spirit, just as also of creatures. But although the Son has from the Father that he is a principle of creatures, nevertheless creatures are said to be from the Son; hence by the same reasoning it can be said that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. Nor does it stand in the way that it is said here "who proceeds from the Father," but not "from the Father and the Son": because likewise it is said "whom I will send," and yet the Father is understood to send, through the fact that "from the Father" is added; so too, through the fact that "the Spirit of truth" — that is, of the Son — is added, it is understood that he proceeds from the Son. For always, as has been said, the Son is joined to the Father, and conversely, with regard to the procession of the Holy Spirit; and thus in a different manner of speaking, for the purpose of designating the distinction of the persons.

Fourth, he sets forth the operations of the Holy Spirit when he says "he shall bear witness": and this in three ways. First, indeed, by instructing the disciples, and affording them confidence to bear witness; Matthew 10:20, "For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you." Second, by communicating his teaching to those believing in Christ; Hebrews 2:4, "God bearing witness with signs and wonders, and various distributions of the Holy Spirit." Third, by softening the hearts of those who hear; Psalm 103:30, "Send forth your spirit, and they shall be created."

Lastly, he sets forth what was to come on the part of the disciples, when he says "and you also shall bear witness," inspired by the Holy Spirit; Acts 1:8, "you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the end of the earth." And concerning this twofold testimony it is said, Acts 5:32, "we are witnesses of this thing, and the Holy Spirit, whom the Lord has given to all who obey him." And he adds the fitness of their testimony, when he says "because you have been with me from the beginning" — namely, of the preaching and the working of miracles — so that they could testify from sight and hearing, according to that word of 1 John 1:1, "what we have seen and heard we announce to you." From which it can also be gathered that Christ did not work miracles in his boyhood, as is held in certain apocryphal writings, but only from the time when he gathered the disciples.