Commentary on the Gospel of John

Above, the Evangelist showed the power of Christ with respect to the changing of nature; but here he shows it with respect to the reformation of grace, which is his principal intention. Now the reformation of grace comes about through spiritual generation, and through the conferring of benefits upon those regenerated. Therefore he first treats of spiritual generation; second, of the divine conferring of spiritual benefits upon those regenerated, and this in chapter 5, where it says, "After this there was a feast day of the Jews," and so on. Concerning the first he does two things. First he treats of spiritual regeneration with respect to the Jews; second, of the spreading of the fruits of this regeneration also to the foreign nations. And this in chapter 4, where it says, "When therefore Jesus knew that the Pharisees had heard," and so on.

Concerning the first he does two things. First he manifests spiritual regeneration in words; second he fulfills it in deeds, where it says, "After this Jesus came, and his disciples, into the land of Judea," and so on. Concerning the first he does three things. First he shows the necessity of spiritual regeneration; second its quality, where it says, "Nicodemus said to him: How can a man be born when he is old?" Third, its manner and reason, where it says, "Nicodemus answered and said to him: How can these things be done?"

Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the occasion for demonstrating the necessity; second the necessity of this regeneration, where it says, "Jesus answered and said to him: Amen, amen, I say to you," and so on. Now the occasion of this necessity is introduced from Nicodemus; and therefore he says, "Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus," and so on. He describes him from his person, from the time, and from his own confession.

From his person indeed he is described with respect to three things: namely, with respect to religion, because he was a Pharisee; hence it says, "there was a man of the Pharisees." For there was a twofold sect among the Jews, namely that of the Pharisees and that of the Sadducees. But the Pharisees agreed more with us in their opinions, because they believed in the resurrection and said that there were certain spiritual creatures. The Sadducees, however, disagreed more, because they believed neither in a future resurrection nor that spirit existed. And these were called Pharisees, as it were "divided" from others. And because their opinion was more probable, and closer to the truth, therefore Nicodemus was more easily converted to Christ. Acts 26:5: "according to the most certain sect of our religion," and so on.

Likewise, with respect to his name, when it says, "named Nicodemus," which is interpreted "victor," or "victory of the people," by which are signified those who, converted from the Jews to Christ, conquered the world by faith. 1 John 5:4: "This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith." Likewise third, with respect to dignity; hence it says, "a ruler of the Jews." For from the beginning, although the Lord did not choose the wise, the powerful, or the noble, lest the power of faith be attributed to human wisdom and power, as is said in 1 Corinthians 1:26, "not many wise according to the flesh, not many powerful, not many noble, but the foolish things of the world God has chosen," nevertheless he willed to convert some wise and powerful men to himself from the beginning, lest, if his teaching were received only by the ignoble and unwise, it should be held in contempt, and lest the multitude of believers be attributed rather to the rusticity and unwisdom of the converts than to the power of faith. Nevertheless he willed that these noble and powerful ones converted to him not be many, lest, as has been said, it be ascribed to human power or wisdom. And therefore it is said in John 12:42 that some of the rulers believed in him, among whom was this Nicodemus; Psalm 46:10: "the princes of the peoples are gathered together."

From the time, however, he describes him when he says, "this man came to Jesus by night," and so on. Concerning which it must be known that the quality of time is accustomed in Scripture to be described concerning certain persons, in order to convey knowledge of their mind, or the condition of their action. Now this obscure time is described here; hence it says, "he came by night." For night is dark, and it fit the quality of Nicodemus's disposition, who came to Jesus not with security and free open declaration, but with fear; for he was one of those rulers of whom it is said in John 12:42 that they believed in him, "but because of the Pharisees they did not confess it, lest they be cast out of the synagogue." For they did not love perfectly; hence it is added, "for they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God." Night also fits his ignorance and imperfect knowledge, which he then had concerning Christ; Romans 13:12: "the night is passed," etc.; Psalm 81:5: "they have not known nor understood, they walk in darkness."

From his confession, however, he is described when it is added, "and he said to him: Rabbi, we know that you have come a teacher from God." Here he confesses Christ's office in teaching, when he says "Rabbi," etc., and his power in acting, where it says, "for no one can do these signs which you do, unless God be with him." And indeed in both he speaks truly, although he confesses but little. For it is true that he calls him "Rabbi," that is, teacher, because, as is said below in chapter 13:13, "you call me Master and Lord, and you say well, for I am." For Nicodemus had read what is written in Joel 2:23: "Rejoice, children of Zion, and be glad in the Lord your God, for he has given you the teacher of justice." But he says too little, because he says that he came a teacher from God, but is silent that he is God. For to come a teacher from God is common to all good prelates; Jeremiah 3:15: "and I will give you pastors according to my own heart; and they shall feed you with knowledge and doctrine"; hence this is not something singular to Christ, although men teach in one way and Christ in another. For other teachers teach only outwardly, but Christ also inwardly, because, as is said above in chapter 1:9, "he was the true light, which enlightens every man"; and therefore he alone gives wisdom; Luke 21:15: "I will give you a mouth and wisdom." And this no mere man can say.

His power, however, he confesses from the signs seen, as if to say: I believe that you have come a teacher from God, because "no one can do these signs" that you do. And he speaks truly, because the signs that Christ did could not be done except divinely, and because God was with him; below, chapter 8:29: "he who sent me is with me." But he says too little, because he believed that Christ did not do signs by his own power, as though needing an external power, as if God were not with him through unity of essence, but only through an infusion of grace. And this indeed is false, because he worked signs not by an external power, but by his own, for the power of God and of Christ is the same. Similar is what the woman says to Elijah, 3 Kings 17:24: "by this deed I have known that you are a man of God."

Consequently, when it says, "Jesus answered and said to him," etc., he sets forth the necessity of spiritual regeneration arising from the ignorance of Nicodemus. And therefore he says, "amen, amen." Here it must be noted that this word "amen" is Hebrew, which Christ frequently used; hence out of reverence for it, no translator, whether Greek or Latin, was willing to translate it. And sometimes it signifies the same as "true," or the same as "truly"; sometimes, however, the same as "let it be done." Hence in Psalms 71, 88, and 106, where we have "let it be done" (fiat), in the Hebrew it is "amen, amen." But of the Evangelists, John alone doubles this word. The reason for this is that the other Evangelists principally hand down those things that pertain to the humanity of Christ, for which, since they are more easily credible, a lesser assertion was necessary; but John principally treats of those things that pertain to the divinity of Christ, which, since they are hidden and remote from the knowledge of men, required a greater assertion.

Next it must be noted that this response of Christ seems altogether inconsistent with what was proposed by Nicodemus, unless it is diligently considered. For how does it seem to agree, what Nicodemus said, "Rabbi, we know that you have come from God," with what the Lord answered, "unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God"? But it must be noted, as has already been said, that Nicodemus, having an imperfect opinion of Christ, confessed him a teacher and confessed that he did these signs as a mere man. The Lord therefore wishes to show him how he might arrive at a higher knowledge of him. And indeed the Lord could have disputed about this; but because this would have turned into contention, the contrary of which is written of him in Isaiah 42:2, "he shall not contend," therefore with gentleness he willed to lead him to true knowledge, as if to say: it is no wonder if you believe me a mere man, because those secrets of divinity cannot be known by anyone unless he has attained spiritual regeneration.

And this is what he says: "unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Here it must be known that, since vision is an act of life, according to different lives there are different visions. For there is a certain carnal life, by which all other things commonly live, and this has carnal vision, or knowledge. And there is spiritual life, by which man is conformed to God and to the holy spirits, and this has spiritual vision. According to the carnal, indeed, spiritual things cannot be seen; 1 Corinthians 2:14: "the animal man does not perceive those things that are of the Spirit of God," but they are perceived by spiritual vision; hence it is added there, "the things that are of God, no one knows but the Spirit of God." Now it is the Spirit who regenerates; hence the Apostle, Romans 8:15: "you have not received again the spirit of bondage in fear, but you have received the spirit of adoption." And this spirit indeed we receive through spiritual regeneration; Titus 3:5: "he saved us by the washing of regeneration of the Holy Spirit." If therefore spiritual vision comes only through the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is poured into us through the washing of spiritual regeneration, then we cannot see the kingdom of God except through the washing of regeneration; and therefore he says, "unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." As if to say: it is no wonder if you do not see the kingdom of God, because no one can see it unless he receives the Holy Spirit, through whom he is reborn as a son of God.

Now to a kingdom belongs not only the royal throne, but also those things that pertain to the governance of the kingdom, namely royal dignity, the benefits of graces, and the way of justice by which the kingdom is made firm; and therefore he says, "he cannot see the kingdom of God," that is, the glory and dignity of God, that is, the mysteries of eternal salvation, which are beheld through the justice of faith; Romans 14:17: "the kingdom of God is not food and drink."

Now in the old law there was a certain spiritual regeneration, but imperfect and figural; 1 Corinthians 10:2: "all were baptized in Moses, in the cloud and in the sea," that is, they received Baptism in figure. And therefore they indeed saw the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but only figuratively; Hebrews 11:13: "seeing them afar off." But in the new law there is manifest spiritual regeneration, yet it is still imperfect, because we are renewed inwardly only through grace, but not outwardly through incorruption; 2 Corinthians 4:16: "although our outward man is corrupted, yet the inward man is renewed day by day." And therefore we see the kingdom of God and the mysteries of eternal salvation, but imperfectly, because, as is said in 1 Corinthians 13:12, "we see now through a glass in a dark manner," and so on. But in our homeland it will be perfect regeneration, because we shall be renewed both inwardly and outwardly. And therefore we shall see the kingdom of God most perfectly; hence 1 Corinthians 13:12: "but then we shall see face to face"; and 1 John 3:2: "when he shall appear, we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is." It is clear therefore that, just as no one has bodily vision unless born, so too no one can have spiritual vision unless reborn. And according to the threefold regeneration there is a threefold manner of vision.

Note, moreover, that in the Greek it does not have "again" (denuo), but anothen, that is, "from above," which Jerome translated as "again," so that it should imply an addition. And thus Jerome understood it, saying "unless he be born again," as if to say: unless reborn once more through a supernatural generation. Chrysostom, however, says that to be born from above is proper to the Son of God, because he alone is born from above; below (in this chapter), "he who comes from above is above all." And Christ is said to be born from above both with respect to time (if one may so speak), because he was begotten from eternity; Psalm 109:3: "before the daystar I begot you"; and with respect to the principle of his generation, because he is from the heavenly Father; below, chapter 6:38: "I came down not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me."

Because, therefore, our regeneration is unto the likeness of the Son of God, according to Romans 8:29, "whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be made conformable to the image of his Son," therefore, since that generation is from above, our generation too is from above, both with respect to time, through eternal predestination — Ephesians 1:4: "he chose us in him before the foundation of the world" — and with respect to the gift of God — below, chapter 6:44: "no one can come to me, unless the Father who sent me draws him"; Ephesians 2:5: "by the grace of God you are saved," and so on.

Consequently, when it says, "Nicodemus said to him," etc., he sets forth the manner and reason of this spiritual regeneration; and concerning this, first is set forth the doubt of Nicodemus; second, the response of Christ, "Jesus answered: Amen, amen, I say to you," and so on. Concerning the first it must be known that, as is said in 1 Corinthians 2:14, "the animal man does not perceive those things that are of the Spirit of God," and therefore, since Nicodemus was still carnal and animal, he could not understand the things that were said except carnally. And therefore what the Lord had said concerning spiritual regeneration, he understood as concerning carnal regeneration.

And this is what he says: "How can a man be born when he is old?" Here, according to Chrysostom, it must be known that Nicodemus wished to object against the words of the Savior. But nevertheless his objection is laughable, because Christ speaks of spiritual regeneration, whereas here he objects concerning carnal regeneration. Likewise all arguments brought forward to attack the things that are of faith are laughable, because they are not according to the intention of Sacred Scripture.

Now Nicodemus objects against the words of the Lord in two ways, according as the word of the Lord seemed impossible in two respects, namely that a man be born again. In one way, on account of the irreversibility of human life: for from old age a man cannot return to childhood. Hence it is said in Job 16:23: "the path" — namely, the present life — "by which I shall not return, I walk." And according to this he says, "How can a man be born when he is old?" As if to say: shall he again become a child so as to be reborn? Job 7:10: "He shall return no more into his house, neither shall his place know him any more." Second, from the manner of carnal generation: for a man at the beginning, when he is generated, is of small size, so that the maternal womb can contain him; but afterward, when he has already been born, he is brought little by little to continual growth, so that he can no longer be contained in the maternal womb. And therefore he says, "can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born again?" As if to say, no, because the womb does not contain him.

But these considerations have no place in spiritual generation, because a man, however much he may have grown spiritually old through sin, according to Psalm 31:3, "because I was silent, all my bones grew old," can, through the help of divine grace, come to newness, according to Psalm 102:5, "your youth shall be renewed like the eagle's." He can, however great he may be, enter into the spiritual womb, namely of the Church, through the sacrament of Baptism. Now what the spiritual womb is, is manifest; otherwise it would never be said, "from the womb, before the daystar, I begot you." Nevertheless there is a certain similarity in what is said; for, just as a man once born carnally cannot be born again, so also one once born spiritually through Baptism cannot be born again, because he ought not to be baptized again; Ephesians 4:5: "one Lord, one faith, one Baptism."

Consequently, when it says, "Jesus answered," etc., the response of Christ is set forth. And concerning this he does three things. First he resolves the arguments of Nicodemus, showing the quality of regeneration; second he manifests the solution through reason, where it says, "that which is born of the flesh, is flesh," etc.; third, through an example, where it says, "do not wonder," and so on.

He resolves, therefore, the objections, showing that the regeneration of which he speaks is spiritual, and not carnal. And this is what he says: "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," as if to say: you understand this of carnal generation, but I speak of spiritual generation. But note that above he had said, "he cannot see the kingdom of God," while here he says, "he cannot enter into the kingdom of God," which is the same thing. For the things that are of the kingdom of God no one sees, unless he enters the kingdom of God; and he sees only so much as he enters. Revelation 2:17: "in the stone a new name written, which no one knows but he who receives it."

Now that spiritual regeneration should come about from the Spirit, has its reason. For it is fitting that what is generated be generated unto the likeness of the one generating; but we are regenerated as sons of God unto the likeness of the true Son; it is fitting therefore that spiritual regeneration come about through that by which we are made like unto the true Son, which indeed comes about through this, that we have his Spirit. Romans 8:9: "if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his"; 1 John 4:13: "in this we know that we abide in him, and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit," and so on. It is fitting therefore that spiritual regeneration come about through the Holy Spirit. Romans 8:15: "you have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear, but the spirit of adoption of sons"; below, chapter 6:63: "it is the spirit that gives life," and so on.

And also for this regeneration water is necessary, on account of three things. First indeed on account of the condition of human nature. For man consists of soul and body, and if in his regeneration there were spirit alone, only that which is spiritual in man would be shown to be regenerated. In order therefore that the flesh too be regenerated, it is fitting that, just as there is spirit there, through which the soul is regenerated, so there be something corporeal there, through which the body is regenerated; and this is water.

Second, on account of human knowledge: for, as Dionysius says, divine wisdom so orders all things that it provides for each thing according to the manner of its own condition. Now man is naturally a knowing being; it is fitting therefore that spiritual gifts be conferred upon men in such a way that they may know them; 1 Corinthians 2:12: "that we may know the things that are given us by God." Now the natural manner of this knowledge is that he know spiritual things through sensible things, since all our knowledge begins from sense. It was fitting therefore, in order that we understand what is spiritual in this regeneration, that there be in it something sensible and material, namely water, through which we may understand that, just as water washes and cleanses corporeally on the outside, so also through Baptism a man is washed and cleansed inwardly and spiritually.

Third, on account of the fittingness of the cause: for the cause of our regeneration is the incarnate Word. Above, chapter 1:12: "he gave them power to become sons of God." It is fitting therefore that in the sacraments, which have their efficacy from the power of the incarnate Word, there be something corresponding to the Word, and something corresponding to the flesh, or body. And this spiritually is the water in the sacrament of Baptism, namely so that through it we may be conformed to the death of Christ, while we are submerged in it when we are baptized, just as Christ was three days in the belly of the earth; Romans 6:4: "for we are buried together with him by Baptism." This mystery, too, was signified in the first production of things, Genesis 1, when the Spirit of the Lord was borne over the waters. But through the touch of the most pure flesh of Christ a greater power was conferred upon the waters: because in the beginning the waters brought forth the creeping thing having a living soul; but from the time that Christ was baptized in the Jordan, water renders spiritual souls.

Now through the fact that here he says, "unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit," it manifestly appears that the Holy Spirit is God. For above, chapter 1:13, it says: "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God, are born." From which the following argument is formed: He from whom men are spiritually reborn is God; but men are reborn spiritually through the Holy Spirit, as is said here; therefore the Holy Spirit is God.

But here there is a twofold question. The first is this: if no one enters the kingdom of God unless reborn of water, and the ancient fathers were not reborn of water, because they were not baptized, then they did not enter the kingdom of God. The other is this: since Baptism is threefold, namely of water, of desire (flaminis), and of blood, and many were baptized by the latter two, whom we say entered the kingdom of God immediately (though they were not reborn of water), it does not seem to be true, what is said here, "unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit."

The response: it must be said, as to the first, that regeneration from water and the Holy Spirit comes about in two ways, namely in truth and in figure. Now the ancient fathers, although they were not regenerated with true regeneration, were nevertheless regenerated with figural regeneration, because they always had some sensible sign, in which true regeneration was prefigured; and according to this, being reborn, they entered the kingdom of God, once the price was paid. As to the second it must be said that those who are reborn by the Baptism of blood and of desire, although they do not have regeneration in act, nevertheless have it in desire (in voto); for otherwise the Baptism of blood would be worth nothing, nor could there be a Baptism of the Spirit. Thus therefore, in order that a man enter the kingdom of God, it is fitting that there be present the Baptism of water in reality, as is the case in all who are baptized; or in desire, as is the case in martyrs and catechumens, who are overtaken by death before they fulfill their desire; or in figure, as in the ancient fathers.

From this, that it is said, "unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit," the Pelagians erred, saying that children are baptized, not indeed that they be cleansed from sins which they do not yet have, but so that they may be able to enter the kingdom of God. But this is false: because, as Augustine says in the book On the Baptism of Infants, it is unfitting that the image of God, namely man, be withdrawn from the kingdom of God, except on account of some impediment, which cannot be, except sin. It is fitting therefore that in children who are withdrawn from the kingdom there be some sin, namely original sin.

Consequently, when it says, "that which is born of the flesh, is flesh," etc., he proves through reason that it is fitting to be born of water and the Holy Spirit; and his reasoning is as follows. No one can arrive at the kingdom unless he be made spiritual; but someone is not made spiritual except through the Holy Spirit; therefore no one can enter the kingdom of God unless reborn of the Holy Spirit. He says therefore, "that which is born of the flesh, is flesh," that is, birth according to the flesh causes birth into carnal life; 1 Corinthians 15:47: "the first man was of the earth, earthly"; and "that which is born of the Spirit," that is, from the power of the Holy Spirit, "is spirit," that is, spiritual.

Note, moreover, that this preposition "of" (ex) sometimes designates the material cause, as when I say, "a knife is of iron"; sometimes the efficient cause, as "a house is of a builder." And according to this, what is said, "that which is born of the flesh," can be understood in two ways, effectively and materially. Effectively indeed, because the power that is in the flesh is effective of generation; materially, however, because something carnal in animals is the matter of the thing generated. But from the spirit nothing is said to be born materially, since the spirit is immutable, whereas matter is the subject of transformation; but it is said effectively. According to this, therefore, we can take a threefold generation. One which is from flesh both materially and effectively, which is common to all who have a carnal state. Another is according to spirit effectively, according to which we are regenerated as sons of God through the grace of the Holy Spirit, and are made spiritual. The third is intermediate, namely that which is from flesh materially only, and from the Holy Spirit effectively. And this is singular and proper to Christ alone: because materially he was born having flesh from the flesh of his mother, and effectively he is from the Holy Spirit; Matthew 1:20: "for that which is born in her, is of the Holy Spirit." And therefore he was born holy; Luke 1:35: "the Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you: and therefore also that which shall be born of you holy shall be called the Son of God."

Above, the Lord set forth an argument to instruct concerning spiritual generation; here he sets forth an example. Now it is given to be understood that Nicodemus, having heard that "what is born of the spirit is spirit," fell into a certain disturbance of doubt; and therefore the Lord says to him, "Do not marvel, because I said to you: you must be born again." Here it must be known that wonder is twofold. One is of devotion, according to which someone, considering the great works of God, recognizes that they are incomprehensible to himself: whence there remains room for wonder, according to that verse of Psalm 92:4: "The Lord is wonderful on high"; and elsewhere, Psalm 118:129: "Your testimonies are wonderful." And men are to be led to this kind of wonder, not restrained from it. The other is of unbelief, when someone, not believing the things that are said, marvels at them. Hence it is said in Matthew 13:57 that they marveled at the teaching of Christ, and it follows that they were scandalized in him. And from this kind of wonder the Lord removes Nicodemus, by introducing an example, when he says, "The spirit breathes where it wills."

This saying, while the same meaning is preserved, can be expounded in two ways as to the letter. In one way, according to Chrysostom, "spirit" is taken for wind, as in Psalm 148:8: "the stormy winds, which fulfill his word." And according to this he says four things about the wind.

First, the power of the wind, when he says "the spirit breathes where it wills," that is, the wind blows where it wills. And if you should say that the wind does not have a will, it must be said that "will" here is taken for natural appetite, which is nothing other than a natural inclination, concerning which it is said in Job 28:25: "who created a weight for the winds." Second, he sets down the sign of the wind, when he says "and you hear its voice"; and "voice" is taken for the sound which the wind makes by striking against some body, concerning which it is said in Psalm 76:19: "the voice of your thunder in the wheel." Third, he sets down the origin of the wind, which is hidden; hence he says "and you do not know where it comes from," that is, where it arises; Psalm 134:7: "who brings forth the winds out of his treasuries." Fourth, he sets down the end of the wind, which is likewise hidden; hence he says "or where it goes" — supply: "you do not know" — that is, where it comes to rest.

And indeed he introduces this comparison to his purpose, when he says "so is everyone who is born of the spirit"; as if to say: if the wind, which is a bodily thing, has a hidden origin, and its course cannot be known, how do you marvel, if you cannot know the course of spiritual regeneration?

But against this exposition Augustine objects, saying that the Lord did not mean the wind, when he said "the spirit breathes where it wills," etc., for concerning any wind we know where it comes from, or where it goes: for the South wind comes from the south and goes to the North, while the North wind, conversely, goes from the North to the south. How then does the Lord say, concerning a bodily wind, "you do not know where it comes from, or where it goes"?

But to this it can be replied that the origin of the wind can be known in two ways. In one way, in general; and in this way it is known where it comes from, that is, from which part of the world, just as it is known that the South wind comes from the south, and where it goes, namely to the North. In another way, in particular; and in this way it is not known where it comes from, that is, in which determinate region it begins, or where it goes, that is, where determinately it ceases. And with Chrysostom nearly all the Greek doctors agree in this exposition.

In another way it is expounded of the Holy Spirit; and according to this he sets down four things concerning the Holy Spirit.

First indeed his power, when he says "the spirit breathes where it wills": because by the free judgment of his power he inspires where he wills, and when he wills, illuminating hearts; 1 Corinthians 12:11: "All these things the one and the same Spirit works, dividing to each as he wills." From which the error of Macedonius is refuted, who held that the Holy Spirit was a minister of the Father and the Son. For he would not breathe where he himself willed, but where it was commanded to him.

Second, he sets down the sign of the Holy Spirit, when he says "and you hear his voice"; Psalm 94:8: "Today if you shall hear his voice, harden not your hearts." But against this Chrysostom objects, saying that it cannot be understood of the Holy Spirit. For the Lord was speaking to Nicodemus, who was still an unbeliever, to whom it was not fitting to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit. But it must be said, according to Augustine, that the voice of the Holy Spirit is twofold. One, by which he speaks within, in the heart of man; and this only the faithful and the saints hear: concerning which it is said in Psalm 84:9: "I will hear what the Lord God speaks in me." The other is that by which the Holy Spirit speaks in the Scriptures, or through preachers, according to what is said in Matthew 10:20: "For it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit who speaks in you." And this even unbelievers and sinners hear.

Third, he sets down the origin of the Holy Spirit, which is hidden, hence he says "and you do not know where it comes from," although you hear his voice: and this is because he comes from the Father and the Son; below, John 15:26: "But when the Paraclete has come, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father." Now the Father and the Son dwell in light inaccessible, which no man has seen, nor indeed can see: as it is said in 1 Timothy 6:16.

Fourth, he sets down the end of the Holy Spirit, which indeed is hidden, and therefore he says "or where it goes" — supply: "you do not know" — because he leads to a hidden end, namely to eternal blessedness. Hence he is called "the pledge of the inheritance," Ephesians 1:14, and 1 Corinthians 2:9: "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for those who love him." Or, "you do not know where it comes from," that is, how it enters into man, "or where it goes," that is, to what perfection it leads him; Job 9:11: "If he comes to me, I shall not see him."

"So is everyone who is born of the spirit," that is, like the Holy Spirit. Nor is this to be wondered at: for as he had said above, "what is born of the spirit is spirit," because in the spiritual man are the properties of the Holy Spirit, just as in a kindled coal are the properties of fire.

Now in him who is born of the Holy Spirit are the aforesaid four properties of the spirit. For first he has freedom; 2 Corinthians 3:17: "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty," because the Spirit of the Lord leads to what is right, Psalm 142:10: "Your good spirit shall lead me into the right land," and he frees from the servitude of sin and of the law, Romans 8:2: "The law of the spirit of life in Christ has set me free, etc.," and so on. Second, you take the sign of him through the voice of his words, which when you hear, you recognize his spirituality; Matthew 12:34: "Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." Third, he has a hidden origin and end, because no one can judge the spiritual man, 1 Corinthians 2:15: "The spiritual man judges all things, and he himself is judged by no one." Or, "you do not know where it comes from" — the beginning of his spiritual birth, which is baptismal grace — "or where it goes," that is, to what he is made worthy, namely eternal life, which is still hidden from you.

Here is set forth the cause and reason of spiritual regeneration: and first is set forth the question of Nicodemus; second, the answer of the Lord, "Jesus answered and said to him," and so on. Now it appears from the first, that Nicodemus, still untutored, and still a sense-bound Jew, could not understand the mysteries of Christ, even through the examples and the arguments set forth; and therefore he says, "How can these things be done?"

For some inquire in two ways. Some indeed out of distrust; as Zechariah, Luke 1:18: "How shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in her days"; and therefore he was punished; Isaiah 40:23: "who brings its searchers to nothing." But others inquire out of a zeal for learning, as the Blessed Virgin, when she said to the Angel, Luke 1:34: "How shall this be done, since I know not man?" And such as these are instructed. Since, therefore, this man asked out of a zeal for learning, he therefore merited to be instructed.

And this is what follows: "Jesus answered," etc., where first the Lord reproves his slowness; second, he answers his question, at the words "and no one has ascended into heaven." He reproves his slowness on three counts: first, from the condition of the person to whom he speaks, when he says "you are a teacher": here the Lord does not rebuke him so as to insult him, but because he still trusted in his own mastery, presuming on his own knowledge, he wished, by humbling him, to make him a dwelling-place of the Holy Spirit; Isaiah 66:2: "To whom shall I have regard, but to him that is poor and little, and contrite in spirit?" And he says "you are a teacher": because if some simple person cannot grasp deep matters, it is tolerable; but this in a teacher is greatly reprehensible, and therefore he says to him "you are a teacher" — that is, of the letter which kills, 1 Corinthians 3 — "in Israel, and do you not know these things," namely spiritual things? Hebrews 5:12: "For whereas for the time you ought to be teachers, you again need to be taught."

If you should say that the Lord would justly reprove Nicodemus, if he had said something to him concerning the old law, and he had not understood it; but he spoke to him of the new law — it must be said, that the things which the Lord says concerning spiritual generation are contained in the old law, but under a figure, according to what is found in 1 Corinthians 10:2: "All were baptized in Moses, in the cloud, and in the sea." And the prophets also said this; Ezekiel 36:25: "I will pour upon you clean water, and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness."

Second, he reproves his slowness from the condition of the one speaking. For that the words of some untutored man not be assented to can be tolerated; but to resist the words of a wise man, and one of great authority, is reprehensible; and therefore he says, "Amen, amen, I say to you, that what we know, we speak, and what we have seen, we testify." For it is required for the fitness of a witness that he give testimony from hearing, or from sight; 1 John 1:3: "what we have seen and heard." And therefore the Lord states both: "what we know, we speak, and what we have seen, we testify." Now the Lord, insofar as he is man, knows all things; below, John 21:17: "Lord, you know all things"; 2 Maccabees 6:30: "Lord, who have holy knowledge, you clearly know." But he also sees all things by the knowledge of his divinity; below, John 8:38: "The things which I have seen with my Father, these I do." Now he speaks in the plural, "we know" and "we have seen," in order to hint at the mystery of the Trinity. Hence, "the Father abiding in me, he himself does the works," below, John 14:10. Or, "what we know" — I, and others made spiritual: because, as it is said in Matthew 11:27, "No one knows the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him." "And yet you do not receive" our testimony, so proven, so firm. Below, in the same chapter: "and no one receives his testimony."

Third, he reproves his slowness from the condition of the things that are said. For that certain difficult things not be grasped by someone is no wonder; but that someone not grasp easy things is reprehensible. And therefore he says, "If I have told you earthly things, and you do not believe; how will you believe, if I shall tell you heavenly things?" As if to say: if you do not grasp these things which are light, how will you be able to grasp the course of the Holy Spirit? Wisdom 9:16: "The things that are on earth we find with difficulty, and the things that are in heaven, who shall search out?"

But against this: it is not found, from what has gone before, that the Lord said any earthly things to Nicodemus. And it must be said, according to Chrysostom here, that when the Lord says, "If I have told you earthly things," etc., it is understood of the example of the wind. For the wind, since it is generable and corruptible, is numbered among earthly things. Or it can be said, according to the same author, that spiritual generation, which is in Baptism, is indeed heavenly as to its principle, which sanctifies and regenerates, but earthly as to its subject: for that which is regenerated, namely man, is earthly. Or it must be said, according to Augustine, that it is to be understood of what he had said above: "Destroy this temple," etc., which is therefore earthly, because he said this concerning the temple of his own body, which he had received from the earth.

"If I have told you earthly things, and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?" As if to say: if you do not believe the temporal spiritual generation, how will you believe the eternal generation of the Son? Or, if you do not believe what I say concerning the power of my body, how will you believe concerning the power of my divinity, and concerning the power of the Holy Spirit?

"Jesus answered," etc. Here he answers the question: and first he sets forth the causes of spiritual regeneration; second, he makes plain what he says, at the words "For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son." Now the cause of spiritual regeneration is twofold, namely the mystery of the incarnation of Christ and of his passion: and therefore he first treats of the incarnation; second, of the passion, at the words "And as Moses lifted up the serpent," etc.

Now it must first be considered how this response of Christ satisfies the question of Nicodemus. For the Lord had said above, speaking of the spirit, that "you do not know where it comes from, or where it goes": by which it was given to be understood that spiritual regeneration has a hidden beginning and a hidden end. Now hidden to us are the things that are in the heavens, according to that saying of Wisdom 9:16: "The things that are in heaven, who shall search out?" The question of Nicodemus, therefore, "How can these things be done?" must be understood thus: how can something come from the hidden realm of the heavens, or go to the hidden realm of the heavens? Hence, before he satisfied the question, he explained this understanding of the question, saying, "How, if I shall tell you heavenly things, will you believe?" And immediately he begins to show to whom the ascending into heaven properly belongs: because it belongs to everyone who descends from heaven, according to that saying of Ephesians 4:10: "He who descended is himself also he who ascended." For this is found also in natural things, that each body tends toward a place according to its origin or nature. Hence in this way it can come about that someone, through the spirit, goes to a place which carnal men do not know, by ascending into heaven, if this comes about through the power of him who descended from heaven: because he descended for this purpose, that by ascending he might open the way for us; Micah 2:13: "He goes up that opens the way before them."

But because he says "the Son of man who descended from heaven," certain persons took from this an occasion for error. For since "Son of man" designates human nature, which is composed of soul and body, from his saying that the Son descended from heaven, Valentinus wished to take it that he had also brought his body down from heaven, and that it had passed through the virgin, taking nothing from her, as water through a pipe: therefore his body was not of earthly substance, nor taken from the virgin — which is against the Apostle, Romans 1:3: "who was made to him of the seed of David according to the flesh." But Origen said that he descended from heaven according to his soul, which he says was created from the beginning together with the Angels, and united to the Word, and afterward descended from heaven, assuming flesh from the virgin. But this too is repugnant to the Catholic faith, which says that souls did not exist before bodies.

It must not, therefore, be understood that the Son of man, according to human nature, descended from heaven, but according to the divine. For since in Christ there is one supposit, or hypostasis, or person, of two natures, namely the divine and the human; from whichever of these this supposit is named, both divine and human things can be attributed to him. For we can say that the Son of man created the stars, and that the Son of God was crucified. But the Son of God was crucified not according to the divine nature, but according to the human; while the Son of man created the stars according to the divine nature. Thus in those things which are said of Christ, the distinction is not to be attended to as regards that of which they are said, because indifferently both divine and human things are said of God and of man; but the distinction is to be attended to as regards that according to which they are said, because divine things are said of Christ according to the divine nature, but human things according to the human. To descend from the heavens, therefore, is said of the Son of man, not according to the human nature, but according to the divine, according to which it belongs to him to have been in heaven before the incarnation, according to that saying of Psalm 113:16: "The heaven of heaven is the Lord's."

Now he is said to have descended, not by local motion, because thus he would not remain in heaven: for nothing moved locally remains at the point from which it descends. And therefore, to exclude local motion, he adds "who is in heaven"; as if to say: he so descended from heaven, that nevertheless he is in heaven. For he descended from heaven, not indeed ceasing to be on high, but assuming a nature which is below: and because it is not enclosed or comprehended, his body existing on earth, he himself according to his divinity was in the heavens, and everywhere. And therefore, to signify that he is said to have descended in this way, because he assumed a nature, he said that "the Son of man descended"; that is, insofar as he was made the Son of man. Or it can also be said that as regards the body he descended from heaven, as Hilary says: not that the matter of Christ's body descended from heaven, but that its formative power was from heaven.

But what is meant by his saying, "No one has ascended into heaven, except the Son of man, who is in heaven"? Did not Paul, and Peter, and the other saints ascend, according to that saying of 2 Corinthians 5:1: "We have a house, not made by hands, in the heavens," etc.? I answer that it must be said that no one ascends into heaven except Christ and his members, that is, the just faithful: for this reason the Son of God descended from the heavens, in order that, by making us his members, he might prepare us for the ascent of the heavens; now indeed in hope, but at last in reality; Ephesians 2:6: "who has raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus."

Here he sets forth the mystery of the passion, by whose power Baptism has its efficacy; Romans 6:3: "Whoever of us were baptized in Christ Jesus, were baptized in his death." And concerning this he does three things: first he sets forth the figure of the passion; second, the manner of the passion; third, the fruit of the passion.

He takes the figure indeed from the old law, so as to lead Nicodemus back to understanding; hence he says, "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert," etc., which is indeed found in Numbers 21:5 — since the Lord, when the people of the Jews said, "Our soul loathes this very light food," sent serpents in vengeance, and afterward, the people running together to Moses, and he himself crying out to the Lord, the Lord commanded that a bronze serpent be made as a remedy, which indeed was both a remedy against those serpents, and a figure of the Lord's passion. Hence it is also said: "He set it up for a sign." Now it is proper to a serpent to have venom; but the bronze serpent did not have venom, but was the figure of a venomous serpent. So too Christ did not have sin, which is venom: because "when it is consummated, it begets death," as is said in James 1:15, but he had the likeness of sin, Romans 8:3: "God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh." Therefore Christ had the effect of the serpent against the movement of fiery lusts.

Now he shows the manner of the passion, when he says "so must the Son of man be lifted up": which is understood of the exaltation of the cross. Hence below, John 12:34, when he had said, "The Son of man must be lifted up," etc., it follows: "this he said, signifying by what death he was about to glorify God." Now he willed to die lifted up, first, that he might purge the heavenly things: for already, through the holiness of his manner of life, he had purged the earth; it remained, through his death, to purge the things of the air. Colossians 1:20: "making peace through his blood, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in the heavens." Second, that he might triumph over the Demons, who prepare war in the air; Ephesians 2:2: "according to the prince of the power of the air," etc. Third, that he might draw our hearts to himself; below, John 12:32: "I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself." Fourth, because in the death of the cross he was exalted, inasmuch as there he triumphed over his enemies: hence it is not called death, but exaltation; Psalm 109:7: "He shall drink of the torrent in the way, therefore shall he lift up the head," etc. Fifth, because the cross was the cause of his exaltation; Philippians 2:8: "he became obedient to the Father unto death, even the death of the cross: for which cause God also exalted him."

Now the fruit of Christ's passion is eternal life; hence he says, "that everyone who believes in him," by working well, "may not perish, but may have eternal life." And this fruit corresponds to the fruit of the figurative serpent. For whoever looked upon the bronze serpent were freed from the venom, and preserved for life. But he looks upon the Son of man exalted who believes in Christ crucified; and thus he is freed from the venom and from sin, below, John 11:26: "He who believes in me shall not die forever"; and he is preserved unto eternal life; below, John 20:31: "These things are written, that you may believe, and that believing, you may have life in his name."

Above, the Lord assigned the cause of spiritual regeneration with respect to the descent of the Son and the exaltation of the Son of Man, and he set down the fruit, namely eternal life — a fruit which seemed incredible to men subject to the necessity of dying. And so the Lord makes this manifest, and first he proves the greatness of the fruit from the greatness of the divine love; secondly he excludes a certain objection, at the place, "For God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world." Now it must be noted that the cause of all our goods is the Lord and divine love. For to love, properly speaking, is to will good to someone. Since, then, the will of God is the cause of things, good comes to us from this, that God loves us. And indeed the love of God is the cause of the good of nature; Wisdom 11:25: "You love all things that are," and so on. Likewise it is the cause of the good of grace; Jeremiah 31:3: "I have loved you with an everlasting love, therefore I have drawn you," namely through grace. But that he is also the giver of the good of glory proceeds from a great charity. And so he shows here that this charity of God is greatest, for four reasons.

First, from the person of the one loving, because it is God who loves, and immensely; and so he says thus, "God so loved"; Deuteronomy 33:3: "He loved the peoples: all his saints are in his hand." Secondly, from the condition of the one loved, because it is man who is loved — worldly, that is, carnal, that is, existing in sins; Romans 5:10: "God commends his charity in us, because while we were yet enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son." And so he says "the world." Thirdly, from the greatness of the gifts: for love is shown through a gift, because, as Gregory says, the proof of love is the showing of a deed. Now God gave us the greatest gift, since he gave his only-begotten Son; and so he says, "that he gave his only-begotten Son"; Romans 8:32: "He did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for us all." And he says "his own," that is, his natural son, consubstantial with himself, not adopted — concerning such it is said in Psalm 81:6: "I have said, you are gods." And through this the falsity of Arius is evident: because if the Son of God were a creature, as he himself said, the immensity of divine love could not be shown in him through the reception of infinite goodness, which no creature can receive. He also says "only-begotten," to show that God does not have a divided love toward many sons, but the whole of it in the Son, whom he gave in order to prove the immensity of his love; below, 5:20: "the Father loves the Son, and shows him all things." Fourthly, from the greatness of the fruit, because through him we have eternal life; hence he says, "that everyone who believes in him may not perish, but may have eternal life" — which he acquired for us through the death of the cross.

But did he give him for this, that he should die on the cross? He gave him indeed unto the death of the cross, inasmuch as he gave him the will to suffer in it; and this in two ways. First, because inasmuch as he is the Son of God, he had from eternity the will to assume flesh and to suffer for us, and he had this will from the Father. Secondly, because the will to suffer was inspired by God into the soul of Christ. Note, moreover, that the Lord, speaking above of the descent that belongs to Christ according to his divinity, named him the Son of God; and this is by reason of one suppositum in two natures, as was said above. And therefore divine things can be predicated of the suppositum of the human nature, and human things of the suppositum of the divine, yet not according to the same nature — but divine things according to the divine nature, and human things according to the human. Now the special reason why he named him here the Son of God is that he set forth this gift as a sign of divine love, through which the fruit of eternal life comes to us. He was therefore to be named by such a name as would befit indicating the power productive of eternal life, which is not in Christ inasmuch as he is the Son of Man, but inasmuch as he is the Son of God; 1 John 5:20: "This is the true God, and eternal life"; above, 1:4: "In him was life." But note that he says "may not perish." For a thing is said to perish when it is prevented from arriving at the end to which it is ordered. Now man is ordered to an end which is eternal life; and as long as he sins, he turns himself away from that very end. And although while he lives he does not perish altogether, in such a way that he could not be restored, yet when he dies in sin, then he perishes altogether; Psalm 1:6: "the way of the wicked shall perish." Now in this, that he says "may have eternal life," the immensity of divine love is indicated: for in giving eternal life, he gives himself. For eternal life is nothing other than to enjoy God. Now to give oneself is a sign of great love; Ephesians 2:5: "But God, who is rich in mercy, has brought us to life together in Christ," that is, he made us to have eternal life.

Here the Lord excludes an objection that could arise. For in the Old Law it was promised that the Lord would come to judge; Isaiah 3:14: "the Lord shall come to judgment," and so on. Hence someone could say that the Son of God had not come in order to give eternal life, but in order to judge the world. And so the Lord, excluding this, first shows that he had not come to judge; secondly he proves it, at the place, "he who believes in him is not judged." He says therefore: the Son of God did not come to judge, because "God did not send his Son" — namely, with respect to the first coming — "to judge the world, but that the world might be saved." A similar thing is found below, 12:47: "For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world." Now the salvation of man is that he arrive at God; Psalm 61:8: "In God is my salvation." But to arrive at God is to attain eternal life: hence to be saved is the same as to have eternal life. Nor ought men to be slothful, and to abuse God's mercy on account of his saying "I did not come to judge the world," by granting themselves license to sin, because although at the first coming he did not come to judge, but to forgive, yet at the second he will come to judge, but not to forgive, as Chrysostom says. Psalm 74:3: "When I shall take a time, I will judge justices." Against this, it is said below, 9:39: "I have come unto judgment." But it must be said that judgment is twofold. One is of discernment; and unto this the Son of God came at his first coming, because by his coming men were made distinct — some by blindness, some by the light of grace. The other is of condemnation; and as to this he did not come, so far as it depends on himself.

Here he proves what he had said, as it were through the topic of division, in this way. Whoever will be judged will be either a believer or an unbeliever; but he did not come to judge unbelievers, because they are already judged: therefore from the beginning God did not send his Son to judge the world. First, then, he shows that believers are not judged; secondly, that unbelievers are not either, at the place, "but he who does not believe is already judged." He says therefore: "I did not come to judge the world," because he did not come to judge believers, since "he who believes in him is not judged" — namely, by the judgment of condemnation, by which no one believing in him with formed faith is judged; below, 5:24: "he does not come into judgment, but passes from death into life"; yet he will be judged by the judgment of reward and approval, of which the Apostle speaks, 1 Corinthians 4:4: "But he who judges me is the Lord." But surely will not many believing sinners be damned? I answer that it must be said that certain heretics said that no believer, however great a sinner, will be damned, but will be saved by the merit of the foundation, namely faith, although he may suffer some punishment. And they take the foundation of their error from this, that the Apostle says, 1 Corinthians 3:11: "no one can lay another foundation"; and further on: "if anyone's work shall burn, he himself shall nevertheless be saved, yet so as by fire." But this is manifestly against the Apostle, Galatians 5:19: "the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness," and so on. "They who do such things shall not possess the kingdom of God." It must be said, then, that the foundation is not unformed faith, but formed faith, which works through charity. And therefore the Lord signally does not say, "he who believes him," but "he who believes in him" — that is, he who, believing in him, tends toward him through charity, is not judged; and this, because he does not sin mortally, by which the foundation is removed. Or, according to Chrysostom, everyone who acts badly does not believe; Titus 1:16: "they profess that they know God, but in their deeds they deny him"; but he who acts well — James 2:18: "show me your faith by your works" — and such a one is not judged, and is not condemned on account of unbelief.

Here he shows that unbelievers are not judged. And first he sets down his statement; secondly he explains it, at the place, "and this is the judgment," and so on. Now it must be known concerning the first point, according to Augustine, that Christ does not say, "he who does not believe, is judged," but says "is not judged" — which can be explained in three ways. For according to Augustine, he who does not believe is not judged, because he is already judged, not in fact, but in the foreknowledge of God; that is, he is already known beforehand by God to be one who is to be condemned; 2 Timothy 2:19: "The Lord knows who are his." In another way, according to Chrysostom, "he who does not believe is already judged" — that is, this very fact, that he does not believe, is unto his condemnation: for not to believe is not to adhere to the light, which is to be in darkness; and this is a great condemnation; Wisdom 17:17: "they were all bound with one chain of darkness"; Tobit 5:12: "what joy shall be to me, who sit in darkness, and do not see the light of heaven?" In a third way, according to the same Chrysostom, "he who does not believe" "is not judged," that is, "is already condemned" — that is, he already has a manifest cause of condemnation. And it is similar to what would be said of someone who has a manifest cause of death, even before a sentence of death is passed against him, because he is already, as it were, dead. Hence Gregory says that in judgment there is a twofold order. For some will be judged by the judgment of examination — namely, those who have something opposed to condemnation, that is, the good of faith, that is, believing sinners. But unbelievers, whose damnation is manifest, are condemned without examination; and of these it is said, "he who does not believe is already judged"; Psalm 1:5: "the wicked shall not rise again in judgment," namely, of examination. Now it must be known that to be judged is the same as to be condemned; and to be condemned is to fall short of salvation, to which there is one single way of arriving, namely through the name of the Son of God; Acts 4:12: "there is no other name given under heaven, whereby we must be saved." And in Psalm 53:3: "Save me, O God, by your name." Those, therefore, who do not believe in the Son of God, fall short of salvation, and the cause of their damnation is manifest in them.

Here the Lord makes manifest his statement, namely that the cause of condemnation is manifest in unbelievers: and first he sets forth the manifesting sign; secondly he shows the fittingness of the sign, at the place, "for everyone who does evil hates the light." Now in the sign he sets forth, he does three things: first he sets forth the benefit of God; secondly the perversity of the mind of unbelievers; thirdly the cause of the perversity. He says therefore: it manifestly appears that he who does not believe is already judged, which appears from the benefit of God: because "the light has come into the world." For men were in the darkness of ignorance, which darkness God indeed destroyed, sending light into the world, that men might know the truth; below, 8:12: "I am the light of the world: he who follows me does not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life"; Luke 1:78: "the dayspring from on high has visited us, to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death." But this light came into the world because man could not approach it of himself: for it "inhabits light inaccessible, which no man has seen, nor can see": 1 Timothy 6:16. It appears also from the perversity of the mind of unbelievers, who "loved darkness rather than light" — that is, they wished rather to be in the darkness of ignorance than to be instructed by Christ; Job 24:13: "they have been rebellious to the light"; Isaiah 5:20: "woe to those who call light darkness," and so on. Now the cause of this perversity is that "their deeds were evil" — which are dissonant from the light and seek darkness; Romans 13:12: "let us cast off the works of darkness," that is, sins, which seek darkness; 1 Thessalonians 5:7: "they who sleep, sleep in the night"; Job 24:15: "the eye of the adulterer watches for darkness." Now from this it is that someone does not believe the light, because it is repugnant to him, by his departing from it.

But surely do all unbelievers have evil deeds? It seems not: for many gentiles acted according to virtue — for instance, Cato, and many others. But it must be said, according to Chrysostom, that it is one thing to act well from virtue, another from natural aptitude and disposition. For some act well from natural disposition, because from their disposition they are not inclined to the contrary. And in this way even unbelievers were able to act well — as, for instance, that someone lived chastely because he was not assailed by concupiscence, and so of other cases. But those act well from virtue who, even though they are inclined to the contrary vice, nevertheless, from rectitude of reason and goodness of will, do not depart from virtue; and this is proper to believers. Or it must be said that although unbelievers did good things, they did not do them out of love of virtue, but out of empty glory. Nor even did they do all things well, because they did not render to God the worship owed to him.

Next, when he says "for everyone who does evil hates the light," he shows the fittingness of the sign he set forth: and first indeed as to the wicked; secondly as to the good, at the place, "but he who does the truth comes to the light." He says therefore: they did not love the light for this reason, that their deeds were evil. And this is evident, because everyone who does evil hates the light. Now he does not say "has done" but "does": because if someone has done evil, yet being penitent, and seeing that he has done evil, grieves, he does not hate the light, but comes to the light. But everyone who "does" evil — that is, perseveres in evil — does not grieve, nor comes to the light, but hates it: not inasmuch as it is indeed manifestative of truth, but inasmuch as through it man's sin is made manifest. For the wicked man loves to know the light and the truth, but hates to be made manifest through it; Job 24:17: "if the dawn should suddenly appear, they think it the shadow of death." And therefore he does not come to the light. And this, lest his deeds be reproved: for no man who does not wish to abandon evil wishes to be reproved, but flees, and hates it; Amos 5:10: "they have hated him that rebukes in the gate"; Proverbs 15:12: "a corrupt man loves not one who reproves him."

Here he shows the same thing as regards the good who do the truth, that is, good works. For truth consists not only in thought and words, but also in deeds. "He comes to the light." But did anyone before Christ act thus? It seems not. For he does the truth who does not sin; but before Christ all sinned, as is said in Romans 3:23. I answer that it must be said, according to Augustine, that he does the truth in himself to whom the evil he has done is displeasing; and having abandoned darkness, he keeps himself from sins, and being penitent for what is past, comes to the light, so that his deeds may be especially made manifest. But against this it seems that no one ought to publish abroad the good he does: hence the Pharisees are reproved for this by the Lord. It must be said that it is lawful to wish to make one's own deeds manifest before God, that they may be approved, according to what is said, 2 Corinthians 10:18: "For it is not he who commends himself that is approved, but he whom God commends." And Job 16:19: "Behold, my witness is in heaven." It is also lawful to wish to be made manifest in one's own conscience, that one may rejoice; according to what is said, 2 Corinthians 1:12: "this is our glory, the testimony of our conscience." But to wish to be made manifest to men for praise, or for one's own glory, is reprehensible. Nevertheless, holy men desire that the good they do be made manifest to men on account of the honor of God and for the profit of the faith; Matthew 5:16: "so let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven." But they come to the light, that their works may be made manifest, because they are done in God — that is, according to the command of God, or through the grace of God. For whatever good we do, whether by avoiding sin, or by doing penance for what we have committed, or by doing good works, all of it is from God, according to that saying of Isaiah 26:12: "you have wrought all our works in us."

Above, the Lord delivered the teaching on spiritual regeneration through words; but here he fulfills that teaching through works, by baptizing. And first a twofold Baptism is introduced; second, a question is raised about the comparison of them, there: "a question therefore arose," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First the Baptism of Christ is introduced; second the Baptism of John, there: "now John was baptizing," etc.

He says therefore first: "After these things" — namely the things that were set forth above concerning the teaching of spiritual regeneration — "Jesus came, and his disciples, into the land of Judea." But here there is a literal question: for above the Evangelist had said that the Lord had come from Galilee into Jerusalem, which is the land of Judea, where he had instructed Nicodemus. How then, after the instruction of Nicodemus, did he come into Judea, since he was already there? To this there is a twofold response: for according to Bede, Christ, after the words to Nicodemus, went into Galilee, and having remained there for some time, returned into Judea; and therefore when it is said "after these things Jesus came," it is not to be understood that he came into Judea immediately after the words to Nicodemus. In another way, according to Chrysostom, it is to be understood that after these things he came immediately into the land of Judea. For Christ wished to preach where a multitude gathered, so that many might be converted; Psalm 39:10: "I have declared your justice in a great Church." And below, chapter 18:20: "I have spoken openly," etc. Now there were two places in Judea to which a multitude of Jews flocked, namely Jerusalem, to which they went for the feasts, and the Jordan, to which they ran together on account of the preaching and Baptism of John. And therefore the Lord, frequenting these two places, as soon as the feast days in Jerusalem — which is in one part of Judea — were completed, came into another part of Judea, where John was baptizing, namely to the Jordan. Morally, however, Judea is interpreted as "confession," to which Jesus comes, because Christ visits those who confess their sins, or the divine praise; Psalm 113:2: "Judea was made his sanctification." And there he abides, because he does not visit such people only in passing; below 14:23: "We will come to him and make our dwelling with him." And there he baptizes, that is, he purges from sins: because unless someone confesses his sins, he does not obtain remission; Proverbs 28:13: "He who hides his crimes shall not be directed aright."

Then when he says, "Now John also was baptizing in Aenon," the Evangelist introduces the Baptism of John; and concerning this he does four things. For first he sets down the person of the one baptizing; second, the place of the Baptism; third, the fruit; fourth, the time. The person baptizing is John; and therefore he says, "Now John was baptizing." But here there is a question: because since the Baptism of John was ordered toward the Baptism of Christ, it seems that, with the Baptism of Christ coming, John ought to have ceased from baptizing, just as, when the truth comes, the figure ceases. To this there is a threefold response.

One, as regards the person of Christ: for John baptized so that Christ might be baptized by him. Nor was it fitting that Christ alone should be baptized by him, lest the Baptism of John, by reason of this singularity, should seem better than the Baptism of Christ; and therefore it was expedient that others before Christ should be baptized by John, because before the teaching of Christ was made public, it was necessary that men be prepared for Christ by the Baptism of John. Hence according to this, the Baptism of John is related to the Baptism of Christ just as the catechism, in which those to be baptized are instructed in the faith and prepared for Baptism, is related to true Baptism. It was also necessary that, after Christ had been baptized by John, others should be baptized by him, lest the Baptism of John should seem to be something to be rejected; just as also, when the truth came, the use of the legal observances did not immediately cease, but, according to Augustine, it was lawful for the Jews for a determined time to keep the legal observances.

In another way, as regards the person of John: for if John, as soon as Christ began to baptize, had ceased from Baptism, it could be believed that he had done this out of envy, or anger. And because, as is said in Romans 12:17: "We ought to provide good things not only before God, but also before all men," therefore John did not cease immediately.

In another way, as regards the disciples of John, who were already beginning to be jealous toward Christ, and toward his disciples, because they were baptizing. Hence if John had immediately ceased baptizing altogether, he would have left his disciples in greater jealousy and controversy against Christ and his disciples. For already, even while John was baptizing, they themselves bore the Baptism of Christ with difficulty: which is clear from what follows. And therefore he did not cease immediately; 1 Corinthians 8:9: "See that this liberty of yours does not perhaps become a stumbling block to the weak."

Now the place of the Baptism was in Aenon near Salim: "because there was much water there." Salim is called by another name Salem, which is the town of which Melchizedek was king. And it is here called Salim, because among the Jews, the reader may use the vowel letters in the middle of words as he wishes: hence, whether it is called Salim, or Salem, it makes no difference among the Jews. Now this that he adds, "because there was much water there," he sets down in order to explain this name of the place, namely Aenon, which is the same as "water." The fruit of the Baptism is the remission of sins; and therefore he says, "and they came and were baptized," that is, were cleansed: because, as is said in Matthew 3:5, Luke 3:7, a great multitude went to John. The time is set down there: "for John had not yet been cast into prison": which he says for this reason, to give one to understand that he himself began the narration of the deeds of Christ before the other Evangelists. For the others began to narrate the works of Christ only from the time of the imprisonment of John. Hence it is said in Matthew 4:12: "When Jesus had heard that John had been delivered up, he withdrew into Galilee." And therefore, because all the deeds of Christ before the imprisonment of John had been passed over, John, who wrote his Gospel last, supplied this deficiency; and he hints at this when he says, "for John had not yet been cast into prison."

But note, that it came about by divine dispensation that John, with Christ baptizing, should not baptize and preach for long, lest from this a schism should arise among the people; although this was permitted to him for some time, lest he should seem to be one to be rejected, as was said above. Thus also it came about by dispensation that, after the preaching of the faith, and the conversion of the faithful, the temple was totally destroyed, so that, namely, the whole devotion and hope of the faithful might be drawn to Christ.

Then when he says, "Now a question arose," etc., the question about the Baptisms is introduced; and first the question itself is proposed; second, the referral of the question to John, there: "and they came to John"; third, the settling of the question is set down, there: "John answered and said to them." Because, therefore, two were baptizing, as has been said, namely Christ and John, the disciples of John himself, being zealous for their master, took occasion for dissension. And this is what he says: "a question arose," that is, a controversy, "from the disciples of John," namely, with them first raising this question, "with the Jews": whom the disciples of John rebuked, because they ran more to Christ on account of the miracles which he was working, than to John, who worked no miracle. And this question arose concerning purification, that is, concerning Baptism. Now the disciples of John took the cause from which they envied and stirred up controversy from the fact that John sent those whom he baptized to Christ; but Christ did not send those whom he baptized to John. From which it seemed — and perhaps the Jews were saying — that Christ was greater than John: and therefore these men, not yet spiritual, contend about Baptism with the Jews; 1 Corinthians 3:3: "For since there is among you zeal and contention, are you not carnal?"

But they refer the question that had been raised to John; and therefore he says, "and they came to John." And if one attends carefully, they tried to stir up John against Christ. These men are like the double-tongued and the whisperers; Ecclesiasticus 28:15: "The whisperer and the double-tongued is accursed, for he troubles many who are at peace."

Now they propose four things, which might cause a disturbance in John's mind against Christ. For first they recall the humility of Christ's former status; second, the benefit bestowed by John; third, the office assumed by Christ; fourth, the detriment which came to John from Christ's office.

Now they recall the humility of his status, when they say, "who was with you," as one of the disciples; but not, "you with him," as with a master: for if honor is shown to someone greater, there is not so great a cause for envy; but then a man envies, when greater honor is shown to one lesser than himself; Ecclesiastes 10:7: "I have seen servants sitting on horses, and princes walking on the ground like servants"; Job 19:16: "I called my servant, and he did not answer." For a master is more disturbed at the rebellion of a servant and a subject than at that of anyone else.

Second, recalling the benefit bestowed by John, they do not say "whom you baptized," because in this they would have confessed the magnificence of Christ, which was shown in the Baptism, and the descent of the Holy Spirit upon him in the form of a dove, and the voice of the Father made to him; but they say, "to whom you gave testimony"; that is, one whom you made illustrious and esteemed dares to repay you with such things — which greatly stirs up exasperation; Psalm 40:10: "He who ate my bread has magnified his supplanting against me."

But because those seeking their own glory, and intent upon their own gain in their office, grieve if another assumes that office, therefore, third, these men add also that Christ took to himself the office of John, when they say: "behold, this one baptizes"; that is, he exercises your office: which greatly stirs up disturbance. For we commonly see here that men of the same craft behave insidiously and enviously toward one another. A potter envies a potter, but not a smith. So too, teachers seeking their own honor grieve if another teaches the truth; against whom Gregory says: the mind of a devout pastor desires that others should teach the truth which he alone does not suffice to teach. So too Moses, Numbers 11:29: "Who will grant that all this people may prophesy?"

But it was not enough for these men merely to stir up John; but they report what moves him more, namely the detriment which seemed to accrue to John from the office assumed by Christ; which fourth point they set forth when they say, "and all come to him," namely those who used to come to you: because, with you set aside and despised, all run to his Baptism. Now that they had previously been accustomed to go to John is clear from the testimony of Matthew 11:7: "What did you go out into the desert to see?" etc. By such envy the Pharisees were moved against Christ; hence they said, below 12:19: "Behold, the whole world goes after him." But by these things John was not moved against Christ: for he was not "a reed shaken by the wind," as is said in Matthew 11:7. And this is clear from the response of John, which follows in the settling of the question referred to him.

Here is set forth John's response concerning the question brought to him by his disciples, which question indeed contained two parts: namely, a complaint about the office he had assumed — hence they said, "Behold, this man baptizes" — and a complaint about Christ's advancement in fame and in the opinion of men — hence they said, "and all come to him." And therefore John directs his response to these two points: first he responds to the complaint about the office assumed; second, to the complaint about Christ's advancement, at the place "he must increase, but I must decrease." Concerning the first he does three things. First he shows the origin of Christ's offices and of his own; second, their distinction, at the place "you yourselves bear me witness"; third, he shows the relation of Christ and of himself to the said offices, at the place "he who has the bride is the bridegroom." Concerning the first, however, note that although John's disciples put the question to John out of malice, and are on this account worthy of reproof, John nevertheless does not rebuke them severely; and this on account of their imperfection: for he feared lest, being stirred up by reproof, they might withdraw from him, and, joining themselves to the Pharisees, might publicly plot against Christ — fulfilling in this what is said of the Lord in Isaiah 42:3: "the bruised reed he shall not break," and so on. Likewise it should be noted that from the beginning of his response he does not assert arduous and illustrious things about Christ, but humble and plain things, on account of their envy. For since excellence is provocative of another's envy, if John had immediately proposed to them the excellence of Christ, he would have provided fuel for their envy. And therefore, proposing humble things, he says, "a man cannot receive anything of himself," intending by this to strike terror into them; as if to say: this fact that all run to him is from nothing other than God, because "a man cannot receive anything" — namely of perfection and of good — "unless it has been given him from heaven," and therefore if you contradict this, you contradict God; Acts 5:38: "if this counsel or this work is of men, it will be dissolved." And thus Chrysostom expounds it, referring this to Christ. Augustine, however, refers it to John himself, and better. "A man cannot receive anything, unless it has been given him from heaven"; as if to say: you are zealous on my behalf, and you wish that I be greater than Christ; but this has not been given to me, nor do I wish to usurp it for myself; according to Hebrews 5:4: "no one takes to himself the honor," and so on. Thus, then, the origin of the offices is clear.

There follows the distinction of the offices, when he says, "you yourselves bear me witness"; as if to say: from my testimony, which I have given of myself, you can know the office committed to me by Christ: for "you yourselves bear me witness" — that is, you are able to bear witness — that I said, "I am not the Christ"; above, 1:20: "he confessed, and did not deny." But I said this, because "I have been sent before him," like a herald before a judge. Thus, then, from my testimony you can know my office, which is to go before Christ, and to prepare the way for him; above, 1:6: "there was a man sent from God, whose name was John." But the office of Christ is to judge and to preside. And if it is well attended to, John, in the manner of a prudent respondent, refutes those who question him from their own words, according to Luke 19:22: "out of your own mouth I judge you."

But how John stands in relation to his own office he shows when he adds, "he who has the bride is the bridegroom": and first he sets down a certain likeness; second he adapts it to the matter at hand, at the place "in this therefore my joy is fulfilled." Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets down the likeness as it pertains to Christ; second as it pertains to himself, at the place "but the friend of the bridegroom," and so on. Concerning the first it should be noted that in human affairs, to dispose, and to rule, and to have the bride for oneself, pertains to the bridegroom alone; and therefore he says, "he who has the bride" — that is, he to whom it pertains to have the bride — "is the bridegroom." Now this bridegroom is Christ; Psalm 18:6: "as a bridegroom coming forth from his chamber." His bride is the Church, which is joined to him through faith; Hosea 2:20: "I will betroth you to me in faith." And in figure of this Zipporah said to Moses, Exodus 4:25: "a spouse of blood you are to me." And of this marriage it is said in Revelation 19:7: "the marriage of the Lamb has come." Thus, then, because Christ is the bridegroom, it pertains to him also to have the bride, namely the Church; but it does not pertain to me except to rejoice that he has the bride. Hence he says, "but the friend of the bridegroom... rejoices with joy." And although he had said above that he was not worthy to loose the strap of Jesus' sandal, here nevertheless he calls himself his friend, so as to intimate the faithfulness of his charity toward Christ. For a servant is not moved toward the things of his lord by the affection of charity, but by the spirit of servitude; a friend, however, out of love, attends to the things of his friend, and faithfully. Hence a faithful servant is as a friend of his lord; Ecclesiasticus 33:31: "if you have a faithful servant, let him be to you as your own soul." And from this the faithfulness of a servant is made clear: when he rejoices in the goods of his lord, and when he procures goods not for himself, but for his lord. Thus, then, because John kept the bride entrusted to him not for himself, but reserved her for the bridegroom, he was a faithful servant, and a friend of the bridegroom. And therefore, to intimate this, he calls himself the friend of the bridegroom. Men who are friends of truth ought to do likewise, so that they do not turn the bride committed to them for safekeeping to their own advantage and glory, but preserve her honorably for the honor and glory of the bridegroom; otherwise they would not be friends of the bridegroom, but rather adulterers. Hence Gregory says that the boy is guilty of adulterous thought if he desires to please the eyes of the bride, through whom the bridegroom sends his gifts. This the Apostle did not do, in 2 Corinthians 11:2: "for I have betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." John likewise did the same, because he did not retain the bride — namely the faithful people — for himself, but led her to the bridegroom, namely Christ. Thus, then, he intimates the faithfulness of his charity through this, that he says "friend of the bridegroom." Likewise, permanence, when he says "he stands" — firm in friendship and fidelity, not raising himself above himself; Habakkuk 2:1: "I will stand upon my watch"; 1 Corinthians 15:58: "be steadfast and immovable"; Ecclesiasticus 6:11: "a friend, if he remains fixed, will be to you as an equal." Likewise attentiveness, when he says "and hears him" — that is, attentively considers the manner in which the bridegroom is joined to the bride. In this, according to Chrysostom, he explains the manner of these espousals; for they are celebrated through faith: "but faith is from hearing," Romans 10:17. Or, "he hears" — that is, reverently obeys, disposing concerning the bride according to the command of the bridegroom; Isaiah 50:4: "I will hear him as a master" — which is against evil prelates, who do not order the Church according to Christ's mandate. Likewise he intimates spiritual gladness, when he says "and rejoices with joy because of the voice of the bridegroom" — namely, when the bridegroom addresses his bride. And he says "rejoices with joy," to show the truth and perfection of his joy. For he who does not rejoice over a good does not rejoice with true joy. And therefore, if I were to grieve over this — that Christ, who is the true bridegroom, preaches to the bride, that is, to the Church — I would not be a friend of the bridegroom: but I do not grieve. Rather, "in this my joy is fulfilled" — namely, that I see what I have long desired, that is, the bridegroom addressing the bride. Or, "in this my joy is fulfilled" — that is, has arrived at its perfect and due measure, now that the bride is already joined to the bridegroom: because now I have my grace, and I have accomplished my office; Habakkuk 3:18: "but I will rejoice in the Lord, and I will exult in God my Jesus."

Consequently, when he says, "he must increase, but I must decrease," he resolves the question as to the complaint about the advancement of Christ's grace. And first he sets down the fittingness of this advancement; second he assigns the reason, at the place "he who is from above is above all." He says, then: you say that all run to him, that is, to Christ; and thus he advances in the honor and fame of the people: but I say that this is not unfitting, because "he must increase" — not in himself, but with respect to others, insofar as his power becomes known more and more; "but I must decrease" — in reverence and fame with respect to the people: for honor and reverence are not owed to me as to the principal, but to Christ. And therefore, with him coming, the showing of reverence toward me ceases; but it increases toward Christ: just as when the prince comes, the office of the legate ceases; 1 Corinthians 13:10: "when that which is perfect has come, that which is in part shall be done away." And just as in the sky the morning star (Lucifer) precedes the sun in giving light, and when the sun comes, its light ceases, so John preceded Christ; hence he is compared to Lucifer; Job 38:32: "can you bring forth Lucifer?" This is also signified in the birth of John, and in his death. In his birth indeed, because John was born at that time when the days begin to decrease; but Christ, when the days begin to increase, namely on the eighth day before the Kalends of January. As to death, because John died diminished by the cutting off of his head, but Christ was exalted by the lifting up of the cross.

Morally, however, this ought to be the case in each one of us. "He" — that is, Christ — "must increase in you," namely, so that you advance in the knowledge and love of him: for insofar as you are more able to perceive him by knowing and loving, so much the more does Christ increase in you; just as one who advances further in seeing one and the same light judges the light to be increasing more. And from this, men so advancing ought to decrease in their own estimation: because the more one knows of the divine height, the less he accounts human smallness; hence Proverbs 30:1 it is said: "the vision which the man spoke, with whom God is"; and it follows: "I am the most foolish of men, and the wisdom of men is not with me." And Job, last chapter, verse 5: "with the hearing of the ear I have heard you, but now my eye sees you: therefore I reprehend myself, and do penance in dust and ashes."

Consequently, when he says, "he who comes from above is above all," he assigns the reason for what has been said: and this in two ways. First from origin; second from doctrine, at the place "he who is of the earth speaks of the earth." Concerning the first it should be known that, among things, in order for each to be perfect, it is necessary that it come to the term owed to it from its origin: just as if someone is born from a king, it is necessary that he grow until he becomes king. But Christ has an origin most excellent and eternal; and therefore it is necessary that he increase through the manifestation of his power, with respect to others, until it becomes known that he is above all; and therefore he says, "he who is from above" — namely Christ according to his divinity. Above (in this chapter): "no one ascends into heaven, except he who descended from heaven"; below, chapter 8:23: "you are from beneath, but I am from above." Or, "he comes from above" according to human nature — that is, from the height of human nature, assuming it in its own loftiness according to how it existed in each state. For it is considered according to a threefold state. The first state of human nature is before sin; and of this he assumed the purity, assuming flesh not stained by the contagion of original guilt; Exodus 12:5: "it shall be a lamb of one year, without blemish." The second state is after sin: and of this he assumed passibility and death, assuming the likeness of sinful flesh as to the penalty, not sin itself as to the guilt; according to Romans 8:3: "God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh." The third is the state of resurrection and glory; and of this he assumed the impossibility of sinning, and the enjoyment of the soul. But here an error of certain people must be avoided, who say that there remained in Adam something not materially stained by the original blemish, and that it was transmitted to his descendants, even down to the Blessed Virgin; and that the body of Christ was formed from this. This indeed is heretical: because whatever was in Adam materially was stained by the blemish of original sin. But the matter from which the body of Christ was formed was purified by the power of the Holy Spirit, sanctifying the Blessed Virgin. This one, I say, who comes from above according to divinity and according to human nature, "is above all," both by eminence of degree, according to Psalm 112:4: "the Lord is exalted above all nations," and by authority and power; Ephesians 1:22: "he gave him to be head over the whole Church."

Here he shows the reason as to doctrine. And first he shows the manner of Christ's teaching, and its height; second, the diversity of those receiving or not receiving that teaching, at the place "and no one receives his testimony," and so on. Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the condition of John's teaching; second the condition of Christ's teaching, at the place "he who comes from heaven is above all." Concerning the first it should be known that a man is chiefly known by his speech, Matthew 26:73: "your speech makes you known"; and the same, 12:34: "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." And hence it is that the condition of a teaching is judged according to the condition of its origin. Thus, then, in order to know the condition of John's teaching, let us first consider the condition of his origin; hence he says, "he who is of the earth" — namely John — not only materially, but also actively: because his body was formed by a created power; Job 4:19: "who dwell in houses of clay, and have an earthly foundation." Second, let us consider his condition, which is earthly: hence he says, "is of the earth" — that is, earthly. And therefore, third, his teaching is described; hence he says, "speaks of the earth" — that is, of earthly things; Isaiah 29:4: "you shall speak from the earth, and your speech shall be heard out of the dust." But how does he speak of the earth, who was filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb? I answer, it must be said, according to Chrysostom, that John says he speaks of the earth in comparison to the teaching of Christ; as if to say: the things which he speaks are small and lowly, such as it is fitting for an earthly nature to take up, in comparison to him in whom "are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge of God," as it is said in Colossians 2:3. Isaiah 55:9: "as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so my ways are exalted above your ways." Or it must be said, according to Augustine, and better, that it must be considered in any man what he has of himself, and what from another. Now John, and any mere man, has of himself that he is of the earth. And therefore, as far as pertains to himself, he has nothing to speak except of the earth; and if he speaks any divine things, he has this from divine illumination; Ecclesiasticus 34:6: "your heart suffers as it were fancies, unless a visitation has been sent from the Almighty." Hence the Apostle also says, 1 Corinthians 15:10: "yet not I, but the grace of God with me"; Matthew 10:20: "for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you." Thus, then, as far as pertains to John, "he is of the earth, and speaks of the earth." But if there was anything divine in him, it belongs not to the one receiving, but to the one illuminating.

Here he sets forth the condition of Christ's teaching; and concerning this he does three things. For first he shows the condition of his origin, which is heavenly; hence he says, "he who comes from heaven is above all." For although the body of Christ was materially of the earth, nevertheless it came actively from heaven, inasmuch as his body was formed by divine power. He also comes from heaven, because the eternal and uncreated person of the Son comes from heaven through the assumption of flesh. Above, in the same chapter: "no one ascends into heaven, except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven." Second, he shows the dignity of his condition, which is the highest; hence he says, "is above all" — and this has been explained above. Third, he concludes to the dignity of his teaching, which is most certain, because "what he has seen and heard, this he testifies." For Christ, insofar as he is God, is truth itself; but insofar as he is man, he is a witness of the truth; below, 18:37: "for this I was born, and for this I came into the world, that I might bear witness to the truth." Therefore he bears witness concerning himself; below, 7:13: "you bear witness of yourself." But he testifies to certain things, because the things he heard were with the Father; below, 8:26: "the things which I have heard from my Father, these I speak in the world"; 1 John 1:3: "that which we have seen and heard." But note that knowledge of a thing is had in one way through sight, and in another way through hearing; for through sight, knowledge of the thing is had through the very thing seen; but through hearing, the thing is not known through the very voice heard, but through the understanding of the one speaking. Because, therefore, the Lord has knowledge received from the Father, therefore it is said that "he has seen," insofar as it proceeds from the essence of the Father, and "he has heard," insofar as it proceeds as the word of the paternal understanding. But because in intelligent beings their being is one thing, and their understanding another; therefore knowledge is received by them in one way through sight, and in another way through hearing. But in God the Father, being and understanding are the same; therefore in the Son, to see and to hear are the same. Likewise, too, because in the one seeing there is not the very essence of the thing in itself, but its likeness, so also in the one hearing there is not the very conception of the speaker, but a sign of it; therefore the one seeing is not the very essence of the thing in itself, nor is the one hearing the very word itself. But in the Son there is the very essence of the Father received through generation, and it is the very Word; and therefore in him, to see and to hear are the same. And thus John concludes, that since the teaching of Christ is higher and more certain than mine, therefore Christ is to be heard rather than I.

Above, John the Baptist commended the teaching of Christ; but here he treats of the diversity of those receiving it: hence he deals with the faith that is to be given to this teaching, and concerning this he does three things. First he shows the rarity of believers; second, the debt of believing, at the place "but he who has received his testimony," etc.; third, the reward of faith, at the place "he who believes in the Son has eternal life."

He says therefore: I say that Christ has certain knowledge, and speaks true things. Yet although few receive his testimony, his teaching is not for this reason diminished, because this is not on his part, but on the part of those who do not receive it, namely the disciples of John, who did not yet believe, and the Pharisees, who detracted from his teaching. And therefore he says, "and no one receives his testimony." Now this word "no one" can be explained in two ways.

In one way, "no one," that is, few, even if some do receive it. And that some do receive it, he shows by adding: "but he who has received his testimony," etc. The Evangelist used this manner of speaking when he said above, John 1:11: "He came unto his own, and his own received him not": because few received him.

In another way, because to receive his testimony is to believe in God; but no one can believe of himself, but from God; Ephesians 2:8: "By grace you are saved." And therefore he says "no one receives it," namely of himself, unless it be given to him by God.

Or otherwise. It is customary in divine Scripture to speak of the people in two ways. For as long as we are in this world, the evil are mixed together with the good; and therefore Scripture sometimes speaks of the people, referring its intention to the evil, sometimes to the good. And this manner of speaking is found in Jeremiah 26: for first it says: "all the people and the priests sought to kill Jeremiah," referring its intention to the evil; and afterward it immediately says that all the people sought to free him, speaking of the good. In the same way John the Baptist too, having his eyes turned to the left, that is, to the evil, says, "and no one receives his testimony"; and turning on the other hand to the right, that is, to the good, says, "but he who has received his testimony," etc.

"But he who has received his testimony" — here he shows the debt of faith, which is to submit oneself to the divine truth. And concerning this he does four things. First he sets forth the divine truth; second he adds the proclaiming of the divine truth, at the place "for he whom God has sent speaks the words of God"; third he intimates the faculty of proclaiming, at the place "for God does not give the Spirit by measure"; fourth he assigns the reason for this faculty, at the place "the Father loves the Son," etc.

Now the debt of faith is that man should submit himself to the divine truth; and therefore he says that although few receive his testimony, yet some do receive it; hence he says, "but he who has received his testimony," that is, whoever he may be, "has set his seal," that is, he ought to place, or has placed, a certain sign in his heart, that Christ himself is God. "And God is true," because he himself said that he was God: for if he were not, he would not be true, whereas it is written, Romans 3:4: "But God is true," etc. Concerning this seal it is said, Song of Songs 8:6: "Set me as a seal upon your heart." And 2 Timothy 2:19: "The firm foundation of God stands, having this seal," etc.

Or, according to Chrysostom, "he has set his seal," that is, he has shown, that God, namely the Father, is true; namely because he sent his Son, whom he promised to send. The Evangelist says this in order to show that those who do not believe Christ deny the truth of the Father. And therefore he immediately adds the commendation of the divine truth, saying, "for he whom God has sent speaks the words of God"; as if to say: he has set this seal, that Christ, whose testimony he receives, whom God has sent, speaks the words of God; and therefore he who believes him believes the Father; below, John 8:26: "The things I have heard from the Father, I speak in the world." Hence he spoke nothing but the Father, and the words of the Father; because he had been sent by the Father, and because he himself is the Word of the Father: hence he even says that the Father speaks through him.

Or if this saying, that God is true, is referred to Christ, the distinction of persons is given to be understood: for since the Father is the true God, and Christ is the true God, it follows that the true God sent the true God, distinct from him in person, not in nature.

Now the faculty of proclaiming belongs to Christ in the highest degree, because he does not receive the Spirit by measure; and therefore he says, "for God does not give the Spirit by measure." For you might say that, although God sent him, yet he does not speak all things from God, but only some things: for the prophets too sometimes spoke from their own spirit, and sometimes from the Spirit of God. As it is read in 2 Kings 7:3 concerning the prophet Nathan, that speaking from his own spirit, he counseled David to build the temple; which counsel he afterward retracted by the Spirit and divine bidding. But the Baptist shows that this has no place in Christ; because the prophets indeed receive the Spirit of God measuredly, that is, with regard to something, not with regard to everything, and therefore they do not speak the words of God with regard to everything; but Christ, who received the Spirit without measure and with regard to everything, therefore speaks the words of God with regard to everything.

But how is the Holy Spirit given by measure, since he is immeasurable, according to Athanasius in his creed: "the Father immeasurable, the Son immeasurable, the Holy Spirit immeasurable"? Response. It must be said that the Holy Spirit is given by measure, not with regard to his own essence and his power, according to which he is infinite; but with regard to the gifts, which are given in measured fashion. Ephesians 4:7: "To each one of us grace has been given according to measure."

It must be noted, however, that what is said here of Christ, that God the Father did not give him the Spirit by measure, can be understood in two ways. In one way it is understood of Christ according as he is God; in another way according as he is man. For a thing is given to someone so that he may have it: now to have the Holy Spirit belongs to Christ both inasmuch as he is God and inasmuch as he is man; and thus according to both he has the Holy Spirit. But inasmuch as he is man, he has the Holy Spirit as sanctifying; Isaiah 61:1: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me," namely, man; but inasmuch as he is God he has the Holy Spirit only as manifesting, according as the Spirit proceeds from him. John 16:14: "He will glorify me," that is, he will manifest me, "because he will receive of mine." So then, in both ways, namely inasmuch as he is God and inasmuch as he is man, Christ has the Holy Spirit not by measure.

For to Christ, inasmuch as he is God, God the Father is said to give the Holy Spirit not by measure, because he gives him the power and ability of spirating the Holy Spirit, who, since he is infinite, the Father gives to him infinitely: and indeed the Father gives him the Spirit just as he himself has him, namely so that just as the Spirit proceeds from the Father, so also from the Son. And this he gave to him through eternal generation. Likewise also Christ, inasmuch as he is man, had the Spirit not by measure; for to men the Holy Spirit is given by measure, because his grace is given to them by measure; but Christ, inasmuch as he is man, received grace not by measure: and therefore he received the Holy Spirit not by measure.

But it must be noted that in Christ there is a threefold grace: namely of union, of the singular person, which is habitual grace, and of headship, which is the grace of influence; and Christ received each of these not by measure. For the grace of union, which is not habitual, but a certain gratuitous gift, is given to Christ so that, namely, in his human nature he might be the true Son of God not by participation, but by nature, inasmuch, namely, as the human nature of Christ is united to the Son of God in person: and this union is called grace, because he had this with no preceding merits. Now the divine nature is infinite: hence from that very union he received an infinite gift. Thus, therefore, he received the Holy Spirit not by measure, that is, the gift and grace of union, which is attributed to the Holy Spirit inasmuch as it is gratuitous.

Habitual grace, however, is so called according as the soul of Christ was full of grace and wisdom, according to what is said above, John 1:14: "We saw him as it were the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace," etc. Concerning this grace, however, there can be doubt whether he received it not by measure. For since a grace of this kind is a created gift, it must be admitted that it has a finite essence: and indeed as to essence, according as it is something created, this habitual grace was finite. Nevertheless Christ is said to have received it not by measure, for a threefold reason.

First indeed on the part of the recipient. For it is manifest that the capacity of any nature is finite: because, although it can receive the infinite good by knowing, and loving, and enjoying it, yet it receives it, in enjoying, in a finite way. Now for every creature, according to its species and nature, there is a determined measure of capacity; which, however, does not prejudice the divine power, as though it could not make another creature of greater capacity; but then it would no longer be of the same nature according to species; just as if a unit is added to three, there will be another species of number. When, therefore, there is not given to some nature, out of the divine goodness, as much as is the natural capacity of its species, it seems to be given to it according to some measure; but when its whole natural capacity is filled, it does not seem to be given to it according to measure; because although there be a measure on the part of the recipient, there is nevertheless no measure on the part of the giver, who is ready to give the whole: just as someone bringing a vessel to a river finds the water ready there without measure, although he himself receives it with measure, on account of the determined quantity of the vessel. Thus, therefore, the habitual grace of Christ is indeed finite according to essence, but it is said to be given infinitely, and not according to measure, because as much is given to him as created nature can hold.

Second, on the part of the gift received. For every form, or act, considered according to its own nature, is not finite in the way in which it is finited by the subject in which it is received; but nothing prevents it from being finite according to its own essence, inasmuch as its being is received in something. For that is infinite according to its own essence which has the whole fullness of being: and this indeed belongs to God alone, who is the highest being. But if some spiritual form is posited as existing not in a subject — for instance, whiteness, or color — it would indeed not have an infinite essence, because its essence would be determined to a genus or species; nevertheless it would possess the whole fullness of that species: hence, according to the nature of the species, it would be without limit or measure, having whatever can pertain to that species. But if whiteness, or color, is received in some subject, it does not always necessarily and always have the whole of whatever pertains to the nature of this form, but only when it is had in such a way as it can be perfectly had; that is, when the mode of having equals the power of the thing had. Thus, therefore, the habitual grace of Christ was indeed finite according to essence; but nevertheless it is said to have been without limit and measure, because Christ received the whole of whatever could pertain to the nature of grace. Others, however, do not receive the whole; but one in this way, and another in that. For "there are diversities of graces": 1 Corinthians 12:4.

Third, on the part of the cause. For in the cause the effect is in some way contained. Whoever, therefore, has present a cause of infinite power for influencing, is said to have that which is influenced, without measure, and in some way infinitely. For instance, if someone had a spring that could pour forth infinite water, he would be said to have water infinitely and without measure. Thus the soul of Christ has grace infinite and without measure, from this very fact that it has the Word united to itself, which is the infinite and unfailing principle of the whole emanation of creatures.

Now it is clear from what has been said that the grace of Christ himself, which is called the grace of headship, according as Christ is the head of the Church, is infinite as to its influence. For from the fact that he had whereby to pour forth without measure the gifts of the Spirit, he received the power of pouring them forth without measure, namely so that the grace of Christ might suffice not only for the salvation of some men, but of the men of the whole world, according to that saying, 1 John 2:2: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world," and even of several worlds, if there were such.

Christ also has the fitting faculty of proclaiming the divine truth, because all things are in his power; hence he says, "the Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand": and this indeed can be referred to Christ according as he is man, and according as he is God; but in different ways in each case. For if it is referred to Christ according to his divine nature, then "loves" does not designate a principle, but a sign: for we cannot say that the Father gives all things to the Son because he loves him, for two reasons. First, to love is an act of the will; but to give nature to the Son is to generate him. If, then, the Father gave nature to the Son by will, the will of the Father would be the principle of the generation of the Son; and thus it would follow that the Father generated the Son by will, and not by nature: which is the Arian heresy. Second, because the love of the Father for the Son is the Holy Spirit. If, then, the love of the Father for the Son were the reason why the Father gave all things into the hand of the Son, it would follow that the Holy Spirit would be the principle of the generation of the Son; which is unfitting.

It must be said, therefore, that the word "loves" imports only a sign, so that it is said that the perfect love with which the Father loves the Son is a sign that the Father has given all things into his hand, namely, whatever the Father has. Matthew 11:27: "All things have been delivered to me by my Father." Below, John 13:3: "Knowing that the Father had given him all things into his hands."

But if it is referred to Christ according as he is man, then the word "loves" expresses the character of a principle, so that it is said that the Father has delivered all things into the hand of the Son, namely, whatever things are in heaven and on earth, according to that saying, Matthew, last chapter, 18: "All power is given to me in heaven and in earth." Hebrews 1:2: "Whom he has appointed heir of all things." And the reason for this handing-over is that he loves him; hence he says, "the Father loves the Son": for the love of the Father is the reason for creating every creature. Wisdom 11:25: "You love all things that are, and hate nothing of the things which you have made." Concerning the love of the Son it is found in Luke chapter 3, and Matthew 3:17: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." And Colossians 1:13: "He has translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love," that is, of his beloved Son.

Next, when he says, "he who believes in the Son has eternal life," he shows the fruit of faith: and first he sets down the reward of faith; second, the punishment of unbelief, at the place "but he who is unbelieving," etc.

Now the reward of faith is inestimable, because it is eternal life; and therefore he says, "he who believes in the Son has eternal life." And this is shown from what has gone before. If the Father has given all things to the Son, namely whatever he has, and he himself has eternal life: therefore he has also given to the Son that he should be eternal life. Below, John 5:26: "As the Father has life in himself, so he has given to the Son also to have life in himself": and this indeed belongs to Christ inasmuch as he is the true and natural Son of God. 1 John, last chapter, verse 20: "that you may be in his true Son Christ: this is the true God, and eternal life." He who believes in him has that toward which he tends, namely the Son himself in whom he believes; but he himself is eternal life: therefore he who believes in him has eternal life. Below, John 10:27: "My sheep hear my voice... and I give them eternal life."

Now the punishment of unbelief is intolerable, both as to the punishment of loss and as to the punishment of sense. As to the punishment of loss indeed, because he is deprived of life; hence he says, "but he who is unbelieving to the Son shall not see life." He does not say "shall not have," but "shall not see": because eternal life consists in the vision of true life. Below, John 17:3: "This is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent": and this vision and knowledge indeed unbelievers will not have; Job 20:17: "Let him not see the streams of milk," etc., that is, the sweetness of eternal life. He says, however, "shall not see," because to see life itself is the proper reward of formed faith.

As to the punishment of sense, because he is gravely punished; hence he says, "but the wrath of God abides upon him." For "wrath" in the Scriptures is taken for the affliction by which God punishes the evil; hence when he says "the wrath of God the Father abides upon him," it is the same as if he said: they will feel punishment from God the Father. And although the Father has given all judgment to the Son, as is said below, John 5:22, nevertheless the Baptist refers this to the Father, intending by this to lead the Jews back to believing in the Son. And concerning this judgment it is said, Hebrews 10:31: "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." He says, however, "abides upon him," because this punishment will never cease from unbelievers; and because all who are born in this mortal life carry with them the wrath of God, which the first Adam received. Ephesians 2:3: "We were by nature," that is, by birth, "children of wrath." From this wrath, however, we are not freed except through faith in Christ; and therefore, in those who do not believe in Christ the Son of God, the wrath of God abides.