Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew

"Seeing the crowds, Jesus." Here the Lord sets forth his teaching, and this is divided into three parts. In the first is set down the teaching of Christ; in the second is set down the power of the teaching; in the third, the end to which it leads. The second is at chapter 13; the third at chapter 17. The first is divided into three. In the second, the ministers of the teaching are instructed; in the third, the adversaries are confounded. The second is at chapter 10; the third at chapter 11. The first is divided into two. In the first, the teaching of Christ is set forth; in the second, it is confirmed by miracles, at chapter 8. The first into two. In the first, a kind of title is prefixed to the teaching; in the second, the teaching itself is explained, at "Blessed are the poor in spirit." Concerning the first he does three things. First he describes the place where the teaching was set forth; second, the hearers of the teaching; third, he sets down the manner of teaching. The second at "and when he had sat down"; the third at "and opening his mouth he taught them." He says therefore — as I said, that they followed, etc.

"Seeing the crowds, Jesus." This text can bear a twofold understanding. First, thus: he went up in order to teach the crowds, that is, not fleeing them. Hence Chrysostom says that just as a craftsman, when he sees the material prepared, delights to work, so the priest delights to preach when he sees the people gathered together; and therefore, "he went up"; Psalm 34:18: "I will confess to you in the great Church." Or otherwise: "he went up," namely fleeing the crowds, so as to teach the disciples more securely; Ecclesiastes 9:17: "the words of the wise are heard in silence."

And it should be noted that we read that Christ had three refuges: for at times he fled to the mountain, as is said here, and John 8:1: "And Jesus went to the Mount of Olives." At other times to a boat; Luke 5:1: "when many crowds pressed upon him... going up into one boat, which was Simon's... sitting he taught." The third, into the desert; Mark 6:31: "let us go apart into the desert." And this is fitting enough; for in three things a man can have refuge in God: in the protection of the divine height, which is signified by the mountain; Psalm 124:1: "they who trust in the Lord are as Mount Zion." In ecclesiastical fellowship, which is designated by the boat; Psalm 121:3: "Jerusalem, which is built as a city, whose participation is in itself." In the solitude of religious life, which is taken through the desert, through contempt of temporal things; Hosea 2:14: "I will lead her into solitude, and I will speak to her heart"; Psalm 54:8: "behold, I have gone far off in flight, and I have remained in solitude."

Now he went up onto the mountain for five reasons. The first, to show his excellence: for he himself is the mountain of which Psalm 67:16 speaks: "the mountain of God, a fat mountain." The second, to show that the teacher of this doctrine ought to ascend to the eminence of life; Isaiah 40:9: "Get you up upon a high mountain, you who bring good tidings to Zion." Chrysostom: no one can stand in the valley and speak of heaven, etc. The third reason, to show the height of the Church to which the teaching is set forth; Isaiah 2:2: "the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be on the top of mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills." Fourth, to show the perfection of this teaching, because it is most perfect; Psalm 35:7: "your justice is like the mountains of God." Fifth, so that it might correspond to the old legislation, which was given on a mountain; Exodus 19 and 24.

Consequently the hearers are set down: "and when he had sat down, his disciples came to him." Two things can be noted in his sitting. Humiliation; Psalm 138:2: "you have known my sitting down." When he was in the height of the divine majesty, his teaching could not be grasped; but then men began to grasp it, when he humbled himself. Or this pertains to the dignity of the office of teacher; below, 23:2: "the Scribes and Pharisees have sat on the chair of Moses." For quiet is required for the pursuit of wisdom. "His disciples came to him," etc., not only in body but in mind; Psalm 33:6: "come to him, and be enlightened"; Deuteronomy 33:3: "they who draw near to his feet shall receive of his teaching." And note that when the Lord preached to the crowds, he stood; Luke 6:17: "Jesus, coming down from the mountain, stood in a level place"; but here, when teaching the disciples, he sat. From this arose the custom that preaching to crowds is done standing, and to religious, sitting.

"And opening his mouth he taught them." Here the manner of the teaching is set down. In his saying "opening," it is signified that he had been silent for a long time before. And it shows that he was about to make a great and long sermon, as Augustine says. Or that he was about to say great and profound things; for so men are accustomed to do; Job 3:1: "after this Job opened his mouth, and cursed his day." And he says "his own mouth": for before he had opened the mouths of the prophets; Wisdom 10:21: "wisdom opened the mouth of the dumb, and made the tongues of infants eloquent": for he himself is the wisdom of the Father.

But here there is a question: for this sermon is set down, as to many points, also at Luke 6:20ff. But there seems to be a contrariety between here and there, as is evident in the text. And Augustine gives two solutions. One is that this is a different sermon from that one: for he first went up onto the mountain, and delivered this sermon to the disciples, and afterward, coming down, he found the crowd gathered, to whom he preached the same things, and recapitulated many of them: and it is of this that Luke 6:20ff. speaks. Or otherwise it should be said that there was one mountain, which had a level place on its side: that level place was raised up by another, smaller hill. Hence the Lord went up onto the mountain, that is, onto the level place of that mountain. And first he went up higher, and called together the disciples, and there he chose the twelve apostles, as is evident in Luke; and afterward, coming down, he found the crowd gathered, and when the disciples came to him he sat down, and delivered this sermon to the crowds and the disciples. And this seems truer: because Matthew says at the end of the sermon that the crowds marveled at his teaching. Nevertheless, whichever is accepted, there is no contrariety.

The Evangelist has set out above, as it were, a brief title of Christ's teaching; now he sets out the teaching itself, and its effect, namely the wonder of the crowds. Now it must be considered that, according to Augustine, in this sermon of the Lord the whole perfection of our life is contained. And he proves this by what the Lord adds as the end to which it leads, namely a certain promise. Now that which man desires most is beatitude. Hence the Lord here does three things. First he sets forth the reward which follows for those who receive this teaching; second he lays down the precepts, where he says, "Do not think that I have come to destroy the law," etc.; third he teaches how one can arrive at keeping them, where he says, "Ask and you shall receive." Concerning the first he does two things, because of this teaching some are only observers, others are ministers. First, therefore, he describes the beatitude of those who observe; second, of those who minister, where he says, "Blessed are you when they curse you." Now it must be noted that several things are set down here concerning the beatitudes; but no one could ever speak of the Lord's words so subtly as to attain fully to the Lord's intent. Yet it must be known that in these words the whole full beatitude is included: for all men desire beatitude, but they differ in judging about what beatitude is; and therefore some desire this, others that. Now we find a fourfold opinion about beatitude. For some believe that it consists only in exterior things, namely in an abundance of these temporal goods; Psalm 143:15: "They have called the people blessed who have these things." Others hold that perfect beatitude consists in this, that man satisfy his own will; hence we say: blessed is he who lives as he wishes. Ecclesiastes 3:12: "And I knew that there was nothing better than to rejoice," etc. Others say that perfect beatitude consists in the virtues of the active life. Others, that it consists in the virtues of the contemplative life, namely of divine and intelligible things, as Aristotle held. Now all these opinions are false, though not in the same way. Hence the Lord rejects them all. The opinion of those who said that it consists in an abundance of exterior things he rejects: hence he says "blessed are the poor," as if to say, not blessed are the wealthy. The opinion of those who placed beatitude in the satisfaction of appetite he rejects when he says "blessed are the merciful." But it must be known that there is a threefold appetite in man: the irascible, which desires vengeance on enemies, and this he rejects when he says "blessed are the meek." The concupiscible, whose good is to enjoy and take delight: this he rejects when he says "blessed are they that mourn." And that of the will, which is twofold, according as it seeks two things. First, that the will be bound by no higher law; second, that it be able to restrain others as subjects: hence it desires to rule, and not to be ruled. Now the Lord shows the contrary as to both. And as to the first he says "blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice." As to the second he says "blessed are the merciful." Therefore both those who place beatitude in exterior abundance, and those who place it in the satisfaction of appetite, err. But those who place beatitude in the acts of the active life, namely the moral acts, err less, because that is a way to beatitude. Hence the Lord does not reject it as evil, but shows it to be ordered to beatitude: for such acts are either ordered to oneself, as temperance and the like, and their end is cleanness of heart, because they make one conquer the passions; or they are ordered to another, and thus their end is peace and the like: for the work of justice is peace. And therefore these virtues are ways to beatitude, and not beatitude itself; and this is "blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God." He does not say "they see," because that would be beatitude itself. And again, "blessed are the peacemakers," not because they are peaceable, but because they tend toward something further, namely that "they shall be called the children of God." Now the opinion of those who say that beatitude consists in the contemplation of divine things the Lord rejects only as to time, because otherwise it is true, since ultimate happiness consists in the vision of the best intelligible object, namely God: hence he says "they shall see." And it must be noted that, according to the Philosopher, in order for contemplative acts to make one blessed, two things are required: one substantially, namely that it be an act concerning the highest intelligible object, which is God; the other formally, namely love and delight, for delight perfects happiness as beauty perfects youth. And therefore the Lord sets down two things: "they shall see God" and "they shall be called children of God": for this latter pertains to the union of love; 1 John 3:1: "See what manner of charity the Father has given us, that we should be called and should be the children of God." Likewise it must be noted that in these beatitudes some things are set down as merits, and some as rewards, and this in each one. "Blessed are the poor in spirit": behold the merit; "for theirs is the kingdom of heaven": behold the reward, and so in the others. And it must also be noted, something concerning merit in general, and something concerning reward in general. Concerning merit it must be known that the Philosopher distinguishes a twofold kind of virtue: one common, which perfects man in a human manner; the other special, which he calls heroic, which perfects above the human manner. For when a strong man fears where fear is to be had, this is virtue; but if he did not fear at all, it would be a vice. But if, trusting in God's help, he feared in nothing, this virtue would be above the human manner, and such virtues are called divine. These acts, therefore, are perfect, and virtue too, according to the Philosopher, is a perfect operation. Therefore these merits are either acts of the gifts, or acts of the virtues insofar as they are perfected by the gifts. Likewise note that the acts of the virtues are those which the law commands; but the merits of beatitude are acts of the virtues; and therefore all things which are commanded and are contained below are referred to these beatitudes. Hence just as Moses first set forth precepts, and afterward said many things which were all referred back to the precepts set forth, so Christ in his teaching first put forward these beatitudes, to which all other things are reduced. Concerning the first point it must be noted that God is the reward of those who serve him; Lamentations 3:24: "The Lord is my portion, said my soul, therefore will I wait for him"; Psalm 15:5: "The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my cup"; Genesis 15:7: "I am the Lord who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give you this land, and that you might possess it." And as Augustine says in Book II of the Confessions, the soul, when it withdraws from you, seeks good things outside of you. Now men seek diverse things; but whatever can be found in any life whatsoever, the Lord has promised all of it in God. For some place the highest good in an abundance of riches, through which they can arrive at the greatest dignities; the Lord promises a kingdom which embraces both; but he says that this kingdom is arrived at by the way of poverty, not of riches. Hence, "blessed are the poor." Others arrive at these honors through wars; but the Lord says, "blessed are the meek," etc. Others seek consolations through pleasures; the Lord says, "blessed are they that mourn." Some are unwilling to be subject; the Lord says, "blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice." Some wish to avoid evil by oppressing their subjects; the Lord says, "blessed are the merciful," etc. Some place the vision of God in the contemplation of truth in this present life; the Lord promises it in the homeland; hence "blessed are the clean of heart," etc. And it must be noted that these rewards which the Lord touches on here can be had in two ways, namely perfectly and consummately, and thus only in the homeland; and by way of a beginning and imperfectly, and thus in this present life. Hence the saints have a certain beginning of that beatitude. And because in this life those things cannot be unfolded as they will be in the homeland, Augustine therefore expounds them according as they are in this present life: "blessed, therefore, are the poor in spirit" — not only in hope, but also in reality. Luke 17:21: "The kingdom of God is within you." Having laid down these things, then, let us come to the letter of the text. In these beatitudes the Evangelist does two things. First the beatitudes themselves are set down; second, the manifestation of the beatitudes, where he says, "Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice's sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven," for this is declarative of all the beatitudes. Now virtue does three things: it removes from evil, it works and makes one work good, and it disposes to the best. First, therefore, he determines concerning the first, where he says "blessed are the poor"; concerning the second, where he says "blessed are they that hunger"; concerning the third, where he says "blessed are the clean of heart," he determines. Now virtue removes from three evils: from covetousness, from cruelty or restlessness, and from harmful pleasure. The first is noted where he says "blessed are the poor"; the second where he says "blessed are the merciful"; the third where he says "blessed are they that mourn." He says, therefore, "blessed are the poor," which is read in two ways. First thus: "blessed are the poor," that is, the humble, who esteem themselves poor: for those are truly humble who esteem themselves poor, not only in exterior things, but also in interior things; Psalm 39:18: "But I am a beggar and poor," against that saying of Apocalypse 3:17: "You say, I am rich, and made wealthy, and have need of nothing; and you know not that you are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked," etc. And then what he says, "in spirit," can be read in three ways. For "spirit" is sometimes called man's pride; Isaiah 2:22: "Cease from the man, whose spirit is in his nostrils, because he is reputed high"; Isaiah 25:4: "The spirit of the strong is like a whirlwind beating against a wall." And pride is called "spirit" because just as wineskins are inflated by breath, so men are inflated by pride; Colossians 2:18: "puffed up by the sense of his flesh." Therefore, "blessed are the poor," namely those who have little of the spirit of pride. Or "spirit" is taken for man's will. For some are humble out of necessity, and these are not blessed, but those who aspire to humility are. Third, it is taken for the Holy Spirit; hence "blessed are the poor in spirit," those who are humble through the Holy Spirit. And these two readings return, as it were, to the same thing. And he says "poor in spirit" because humility gives the Holy Spirit; Isaiah 66:2: "To whom shall I have respect, but to him that is poor and little, and of a contrite spirit, and that trembles at my words?" To these poor is promised the kingdom, in which supreme excellence is understood. And although this is bestowed in return for any virtue whatsoever, it is nevertheless given especially to humility, because "everyone who humbles himself shall be exalted," below, chapter 23:12. And Proverbs 29:23: "Glory shall uphold the humble in spirit." Or otherwise, according to Jerome: "poor in spirit," to the letter, in the renunciation of temporal things. And he says "in spirit," because some are poor out of necessity, but to them beatitude is not owed, but to those who are poor by will. And these latter are spoken of in two ways: for even if some have riches, yet they do not have them in their heart; Psalm 61:11: "If riches abound, set not your heart upon them." Others neither have them nor desire them, and this is more secure, because the mind is drawn away from spiritual things by riches; and these are properly called poor in spirit, because acts of the gifts, which are above the human manner, belong to the blessed man; and that a man should cast off all riches, so as not even to desire them in any way, this is above the human manner. To these is promised the kingdom of heaven, in which is noted not only the height of honor, but the abundance of riches; James 2:5: "Has not God chosen the poor in this world, rich in faith?" And note that Moses first promised riches; Deuteronomy 28:1: "The Lord your God will make you higher than all the nations that are upon the earth"; and below: "Blessed shall you be in the city, and blessed in the field." And therefore, that the Lord might distinguish the old law from the new, he first places beatitude in the contempt of temporal riches. Likewise, according to Augustine, note that this beatitude pertains to the gift of fear, because fear, especially filial fear, makes one have reverence toward God, and from this man holds riches in contempt. Isaiah sets down the beatitudes in descending order; Isaiah 11:1-3: "There shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of his root, and the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the spirit of counsel and of fortitude, the spirit of knowledge and of godliness, and he shall be filled with the spirit of the fear of the Lord." Christ, conversely, ascends from the gift of fear, that is, from poverty, because Isaiah foretold the coming of Christ to the earth, whereas Christ drew things upward from the earth. "Blessed are the meek." This is the second beatitude; but lest anyone say that poverty alone suffices for beatitude, he shows that it does not suffice: rather, meekness is also required, which tempers anger, just as temperance tempers concupiscence; for he is meek who is not even provoked. Now this can happen through virtue, namely that you not become angry except for a just cause; but if even when you have a just cause you are not provoked, this is above the human manner; and therefore he says "blessed are the meek." For strife arises on account of an abundance of exterior things; and therefore there would never be disturbance, if man did not desire riches; and therefore those who are not meek are not poor in spirit. And for this reason he immediately adds "blessed are the meek." And note that this consists in two things. First, that a man not become angry; second, that if he does become angry, he temper his anger. Thus says Ambrose: "It belongs to the prudent man to temper the movement of anger, nor is it called a lesser virtue to be angry with moderation than not to be angry at all; and I judge the latter to be lighter, the former stronger," etc. Chrysostom says: "Among many eternal promises he places one earthly one." Hence, to the letter, the meek possess this earth. For many strive at law in order to acquire possessions, but frequently lose life and everything; but frequently the meek have everything; Psalm 36:11: "The meek shall inherit the land." But it is better expounded as referring to the future. And then it can be expounded in many ways. Hilary thus: "they shall possess the earth," that is, the glorified body of Christ, because they will be conformed in their own body to that brightness; Isaiah 33:17: "They shall see the king in his beauty; their eyes shall behold the land afar off"; Philippians 3:21: "He will reform the body of our lowness, made like to the body of his glory." Or otherwise: this earth is now the earth of the dead, because it is subject to corruption, but it will be freed from corruption according to the Apostle, Romans 8:21. Therefore this earth, when it will be made bright and freed from the servitude of corruption, will be called the land of the living. Or by "earth" is understood the empyrean heaven, in which the blessed are: and it is called earth, because as earth stands to heaven, so that heaven stands to the heaven of the holy Trinity. Or, "they shall possess the earth," that is, their own glorified body. Augustine expounds it metaphorically, and says that by this is to be understood a certain solidity of the saints in the knowledge of the first truth; Psalm 26:13: "I believe to see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living." This second beatitude is adapted to the gift of piety, because those properly become angry who are not content with the divine ordination. "Blessed are they that mourn," etc. Two beatitudes have been set down, by which we are drawn away from the evil of covetousness and of cruelty; here a third is set down, by which we are drawn away from the evil of harmful or noxious pleasure: and this is "blessed are they that mourn." In the Old Testament earthly things were promised, and earthly gladness; Jeremiah 31:12: "They shall flow together to the good things of the Lord, for the corn, and the wine, and the oil," etc.; and afterward: "Then shall the virgin rejoice in the dance, the young men and the old together." But by contrast the Lord places beatitude in mourning. Now it must be noted that not every kind of weeping can be called mourning, but that by which one weeps for a dead person dear to oneself: for the Lord speaks here by way of excess. Just as above, "blessed are the poor," so here he makes mention of the greatest mourning; for just as those who weep for the dead receive no consolation, so the Lord wishes our life to be in mourning; Jeremiah 6:26: "Make yourself a mourning as for an only son, a bitter lamentation," etc. And this mourning can be expounded in three ways. First, for sins not only one's own but also those of others: for if we mourn carnally for the dead, much more should we mourn spiritually; 1 Kings 16:1: "How long will you mourn for Saul?" etc. Jeremiah 9:1: "Who will give water to my head, and a fountain of tears to my eyes? And I will weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people." Now this beatitude is quite fittingly placed after the one before. For someone might say: it suffices not to do evil; and this is true from the beginning, before sin; but after sin has been committed, it does not suffice unless you make satisfaction. Second, it can be taken of mourning for the sojourn of the present misery; Psalm 119:5: "Woe is me, that my sojourning is prolonged." This is the "watering from above and from below" of which Joshua 15:19 speaks: "weep for your sins, and for the sojourning in the heavenly homeland." Third, according to Augustine, for the mourning which men have for the joys of the world, which they leave behind in coming to Christ: for some men die to the world, and the world dies to them; Galatians 6:14: "By whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world." Now just as we mourn over the dead, so they mourn: because it cannot be that, in giving something up, they do not feel some sorrow. Now to this threefold mourning a threefold consolation corresponds: for to mourning for sins is given the remission of sins, which David sought, saying, Psalm 50:14: "Restore to me the joy of your salvation." To the delay of the heavenly homeland, and to the sojourn of the present misery, corresponds the consolation of eternal life, of which Jeremiah 31:13: "I will turn their mourning into joy, and will comfort them, and make them joyful after their sorrow"; and Isaiah 66:13: "In Jerusalem you shall be comforted." Third, to mourning corresponds the consolation of divine love: for when someone grieves over the loss of a beloved thing, he receives consolation if he acquires another thing more beloved. Hence men are consoled when, in place of temporal things, they receive spiritual and eternal ones, which is to receive the Holy Spirit; wherefore he is called the Paraclete, John 15:26. For through the Holy Spirit, who is divine love, men will rejoice; John 16:20: "Your sorrow shall be turned into joy." And it must be noted that this beatitude is appropriated to the gift of knowledge, because those mourn who recognize the miseries of others; hence of certain people who do not have this knowledge it is said, Wisdom 14:22: "Living in a great war of ignorance, they call so many and so great evils peace"; conversely, Ecclesiastes 1:18: "He who adds knowledge, adds also labor." And it must be noted that these rewards are so ordered that each successive one adds something over the first. For first he said "blessed are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven"; afterward, "for they shall possess the land": for it is more to possess than merely to have. Likewise, afterward, "for they shall be comforted": for it is more to be comforted than to possess, for some possess these things but do not delight in them. Following upon the beatitudes which pertain to the removal of evil, here is set down the beatitude which pertains to the working of good. Now our good is twofold, namely of justice and of mercy. And therefore he sets down two things. As to the first he says, "blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice." Justice is taken in three ways, according to Chrysostom and the Philosopher. Sometimes it is taken for every virtue: and every virtue is called legal justice, which prescribes concerning the acts of the virtues. Hence insofar as man obeys the law, he fulfills the work of all the virtues. In another way it is taken as it is a special virtue, one of the four cardinal virtues, which is opposed to avarice, or injustice, and concerns buying, selling, and hiring. What is said here, then, "who hunger after justice," can be understood generally or specially. If it is understood of justice in general, this is said for two reasons. The first is Jerome's, who says that it does not suffice for a man to perform the work of justice, unless he perform it with desire; Psalm 53:8: "I will freely sacrifice to you," etc. And elsewhere, Psalm 41:3: "My soul has thirsted after God, the living fountain," etc. Amos 8:11: "I will send a famine into that land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water, but of hearing the word of God." Therefore there is hunger when someone works with desire. The other reason: justice is twofold, perfect and imperfect. Perfect justice we cannot have in this world, "for if we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us," 1 John 1:8. And Isaiah 64:6: "All our righteousnesses are as a filthy rag." But this we shall have in heaven; Isaiah 60:21: "Your people shall be all just, they shall inherit the land forever." But we can have the desire for justice here; and therefore he says, "blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice," etc. And this is like what Pythagoras did. For in the time of Pythagoras those who pursued learning were called sophi, that is, wise men; but Pythagoras did not wish to be called sophos, that is, wise, but philosophus, that is, a lover of wisdom: so the Lord wishes that his own be, and be called, lovers of justice. But if it is understood of special justice, which is that man render to each what is his own, it is fittingly said, "blessed are they that hunger," etc.; because hunger and thirst are properly characteristic of the avaricious, since those who desire to possess the goods of others unjustly are never satisfied; hence this hunger of which the Lord speaks is opposed to that, namely to the hunger of the avaricious. And the Lord wishes that we so pant after this justice that we may never, as it were, be satisfied in this life, just as the avaricious man is never satisfied. "Blessed, therefore, are they that hunger and thirst after justice, for they shall be filled." A fitting reward is set down, "they shall be filled," first in the eternal vision, for they shall see God through his essence; Psalm 16:15: "I shall be satisfied when your glory shall appear": for there nothing will remain to be desired; Psalm 102:5: "Who satisfies your desire with good things"; Proverbs 10:24: "The desire of the just shall be granted." Second, in the present life. And this is twofold. One is in spiritual goods, that is, in the fulfilling of God's commandments; John 4:34: "My meat is to do the will of him who sent me, that I may perfect his work": and Augustine expounds it in this way. In another way it is taken of the satisfaction of temporal things. Unjust men are never satisfied, but men who have their limit in justice itself do not go beyond it; Proverbs 13:25: "The just eats and fills his soul." This beatitude, according to Augustine, is reduced to the gift of fortitude, because that a man work justly pertains to fortitude. Likewise it adds something to the reward set down above, because to be filled is to have one's desire wholly fulfilled. Likewise note that first he says "blessed are they that mourn": for when a man is sick, he does not desire to eat, but he begins to desire it when he is beginning to be healed; and so it is in spiritual things, that when men are in sin, they do not feel spiritual hunger, but when they abandon their sins, then they feel it; and therefore he immediately adds "blessed are the merciful": because justice without mercy is cruelty, and mercy without justice is the mother of dissolution. And therefore it is fitting that the two be joined together, according to Proverbs 3:3: "Let mercy and truth not leave you," etc. Psalm 84:11: "Mercy and truth have met each other," etc. "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." To be merciful is to have a heart made wretched by the wretchedness of others: now we have mercy over the wretchedness of others when we reckon it, as it were, as our own. Now over our own we grieve, and we strive to drive it away. Therefore you are truly merciful when you strive to drive away the wretchedness of others. Now there is a twofold wretchedness of one's neighbor. The first is in these temporal things, and toward this we ought to have a wretched heart; 1 John 3:17: "He who has the substance of this world, and shall see his brother in need, and shall shut up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him?" The second is that by which a man is made wretched through sin: for just as beatitude is in the works of the virtues, so wretchedness properly is in vices; Proverbs 14:34: "Sin makes nations miserable." And therefore when we admonish those who are falling to return, we are merciful; below, 9:36: "And Jesus, seeing the crowds, was moved with mercy." These, therefore, the merciful, are blessed. And why? "For they shall obtain mercy." And it must be known that the gifts of God always exceed our merits; Ecclesiasticus 35:13: "For the Lord is one who repays, and he will repay you sevenfold." Therefore the mercy which the Lord will bestow upon us is much greater than that which we bestow upon our neighbor. This mercy is begun in this life in two ways. First, because sins are forgiven; Psalm 102:3: "Who forgives all your iniquities." Second, because he removes temporal defects, so that he makes his sun to rise; yet it will be perfected in the future, when all wretchedness, both of fault and of punishment, will be removed; Psalm 35:6: "O Lord, your mercy is in heaven." And this is "for they shall obtain mercy." This beatitude is reduced to the gift of counsel, because it is a singular counsel that amid the dangers of this world we should obtain mercy; 1 Timothy 4:8: "Godliness is profitable for all things"; Daniel 4:24: "Let my counsel be acceptable to the king." Thus, then, the acts of the virtues have been set down, by which we are removed from evil and by which we work good. Now are set down the acts by which we are disposed to the best; hence, "blessed are the clean of heart," etc. This beatitude consists in two things: in the vision of God and in the love of neighbor; hence he first sets down the beatitude which pertains to the vision of God, and second the beatitude which pertains to the love of neighbor, where he says "blessed are the peacemakers," etc. He says, therefore, "blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God." Here first there is a literal question. For we have it that God cannot be seen: 1 John 4:12: "No man has seen God at any time." And lest anyone should say that, although no one sees him in the present, he will see him in the future, the Apostle removes this, 1 Timothy 6:16: "He inhabits light inaccessible, whom no man has seen, nor can see." But it must be known that on this point there are diverse opinions. For some have held that God is never seen through his essence, but only in some refulgence of his brightness; but the Gloss rejects this, on the text of Exodus 33:20, "Man shall not see me, and live," for two reasons. First, because this is repugnant to the authority of sacred Scripture, 1 John 3:2: "We shall see him as he is." Likewise 1 Corinthians 13:12: "We see now through a glass in a dark manner, but then face to face." Likewise it is repugnant to reason, because the beatitude of man is the ultimate good of man, in which his desire is set at rest. Now it is a natural desire that a man, seeing effects, should inquire concerning the cause: hence too the wonder of the philosophers was the origin of philosophy, because seeing effects they marveled, and sought the cause. This desire, therefore, will not be set at rest, until it arrives at the first cause, which is God, namely at the divine essence itself. He will therefore be seen through his essence. Others have erred even more in holding the contrary: for they said that we shall see the essence of God not only with the eye of the mind, but also with that of the body, and that Christ sees the divine essence with a bodily eye. But this is not fitting: which is clear, first, from the authority set down here, because he would not have said "blessed are the clean of heart," but "blessed are they that have clean and pure eyes." Therefore he gives us to understand that God is seen only by the heart, that is, by the intellect: for "heart" is taken here in the same way as in Ephesians 1:18, "the eyes of your heart being enlightened." Second, because a bodily sense can attain only to its own object; and if it be said that then it will have a greater power, it must be said that then it would not be bodily vision, because the bodily eye sees nothing but colors, and the essence only accidentally, according to Augustine, City of God, last book, chapter 19. Just as when I see a living thing, we can say that I see life, insofar as I see certain signs by which its life is indicated to me; so it will be in the divine vision, because there will be so great a refulgence in the new heaven, and the new earth, and in glorified bodies, that through these we shall be said to see God as it were with bodily eyes. "Blessed, therefore, are the clean of heart," etc. He resolves the text, "no man has seen God at any time," in three ways. First, because not by a comprehensive vision; second, not with bodily eyes; third, not in this life: for if it was granted to anyone to see God in this life, this was because he was totally taken out of himself and raised above the bodily senses. And therefore it is said "blessed are the clean of heart": because just as the eye which sees color must be clear, so must the mind which sees God; Wisdom 1:1: "Seek him in simplicity of heart, for he is found by those who do not tempt him; and he appears to those who have faith in him": for by faith the heart is purified; Acts 15:9: "Purifying their hearts by faith." And because vision will succeed to faith, therefore it is said, "for they shall see God." "Blessed are the clean of heart," namely those who have a general cleanness from alien thoughts, through which their heart is a holy temple of God, in which they see God to be contemplated: for "temple" seems to be named from "contemplating." But specially, "blessed are the clean of heart," that is, those who have cleanness of the flesh: for nothing so impedes spiritual contemplation as uncleanness of the flesh. "Follow peace, and holiness, without which no man shall see God," Hebrews 12:14. And therefore some say that the moral virtues are of profit for the contemplative life, and especially chastity. And according to this, "blessed are the clean of heart" can be understood of the vision proper to this present life: for the saints who have a heart filled with justice see more excellently than others who see through bodily effects; for the nearer effects are, the more God is known through them. Hence the saints, who have justice, charity, and effects of this kind, which are most similar to God, know more than others; Psalm 33:9: "Taste, and see that the Lord is sweet." "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." Here is set down the seventh beatitude; and, as has been said, the virtues that dispose to the best dispose to two things, namely to the vision of God and to love. And just as cleanness of heart disposes to the vision of God, so peace disposes to the love of God, by which we are named and are the children of God; and thus it also disposes to the love of neighbor, because, as is said in 1 John 4:20, "he who does not love his brother whom he sees, how can he love God whom he does not see?" And it must be noted that here two rewards of beatitude are set down, namely "blessed are the peacemakers," and "blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice's sake." And all the preceding beatitudes are reduced to these two, and are the effects of all the preceding ones. For what is achieved through poverty of spirit, through mourning, through meekness, except that one should have a clean heart? What through justice and mercy, except that we should have peace? Isaiah 32:17: "The fruit of justice is peace, and the cultivation of justice, quietness and security forever." "Blessed, therefore, are the peacemakers." But it must be seen what peace is, and how we can arrive at it. Peace is the tranquility of order. Now order is the disposition which gives to equal and unequal things their proper places. Therefore peace consists in this, that all things hold their proper places. Hence the mind of man ought, first, to be subject to God. Second, the lower movements and powers, which are common to us and to brute animals, ought to be subject to man: for by reason man rules over the animals; Genesis 1:26: "Let us make man to our image and likeness, and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moves upon the earth." Third, that man have peace toward others, for thus he will be wholly ordered. Now this ordering can exist only in holy men; Psalm 118:165: "Much peace have they that love your name"; Isaiah 48:22: "There is no peace to the wicked": for they cannot have interior peace; Wisdom 14:22: "Living in a great war of ignorance, they call so many and so great evils peace." Such peace the world cannot give; John 14:27: "Not as the world gives do I give to you." Likewise, all this alone does not suffice, but they ought to make peace among those who are at discord; Proverbs 12:20: "Joy follows them that take counsels of peace." Yet it must be known that this peace is begun here, but is not perfected, because no one can have all his brutish movements wholly subject to reason; Romans 7:23: "I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and captivating me in the law of sin which is in my members." Hence it will be true in eternal life; Psalm 4:9: "In peace, in the very same, I will sleep, and I will rest"; Philippians 4:7: "The peace of God surpasses all understanding." "For they shall be called the children of God," for a threefold reason. The first is, because they have the office of the son of God: for the Son is said to have come into the world for this, that he might gather together the scattered; Ephesians 2:14: "For he is our peace"; Colossians 1:20: "Making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things on earth and the things in heaven." Second, because through peace, together with charity, one arrives at the eternal kingdom, in which all are called children of God; Wisdom 5:5: "Behold how they are numbered among the children of God, and their lot is among the saints." Ephesians 4:3: "Careful to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace." Third, because through this man is made like to God, because where there is peace, there is no resistance; but no one can resist God; Job 9:4: "Who has resisted him, and had peace?" And it must be noted that these beatitudes each add something over the one before: for it is more to obtain mercy than to be filled, because to be filled is to be filled with what is proportioned to oneself, but mercy overflows abundantly. Likewise, not all who receive mercy are admitted by the king to see the king. Likewise, it is more to be a son of the king than to see the king. And yet it must be known that by all these one single reward is designated. But why did the Lord wish to signify that by so many things? It must be said that all the things which are divided in lower things are gathered together in higher things. And because in human affairs these are found dispersed, and we are led by the hand through sensible things, therefore the Lord signified that one eternal reward through many things. Now this seventh beatitude is adapted to the gift of wisdom, for wisdom makes one a child of God. Likewise it must be noted that in the seventh beatitude peace is set down, just as on the seventh day there is rest, Genesis 2:2. Following upon this the eighth beatitude is set down, which designates the perfection of all the preceding ones: for then is a man perfect in all of them, when he abandons none of them on account of tribulations; Ecclesiasticus 27:6: "The furnace tries the potter's vessels, and the trial of tribulation just men." "Blessed, therefore, are they that suffer persecution," etc. But someone, perhaps, hearing "blessed are the peacemakers," will say that these are not blessed on account of persecution, because persecution disturbs peace, or takes it away entirely; but certainly not interior peace, only exterior; Psalm 118:165: "Much peace have they that love your law," etc. Now persecution itself does not make one blessed, but its cause: hence he says "for justice's sake"; 1 Peter 3:14: "If you suffer anything for justice's sake, blessed are you." Chrysostom: he does not say "by the pagans and for the faith," but "for justice's sake."

Hence he says: for justice's sake, 1 Peter 3:14: "If you suffer anything..." Chrysostom: he does not say "by the pagans" and "according to the faith," but "for justice's sake," because martyrdom is not from just anyone or for just any cause, but for the father's justice — Ecclesiasticus 4:33: "Strive for justice." The prophets were killed not because they denied the faith but because they announced the truth; John the Baptist, because he announced the truth, was killed and was a martyr. And it should be noted that this beatitude is placed in the eighth position, just as circumcision was performed on the eighth day, in which a certain general circumcision of the martyrs is foretold. "For theirs is the kingdom." This appears to be the same as what is set down in the first beatitude; hence it is explained variously by the saints. For some say that this is the same as what is said: "Blessed are the poor, for theirs...," and this in order to designate the perfection of patience, James 1:4; for perfection is always designated by the fact that it returns to its own starting-point, as appears in a circle. Likewise, he who suffers persecution for justice's sake is poor, and all the other things are owed to him, since he is also meek and merciful, and so with all the rest; and therefore not only the first reward is owed to him but all the rewards. Others say that it is not the same; hence Ambrose says that the kingdom of heaven is set down here with respect to the glory of the soul and heart: for to the power of the soul the kingdom of heaven corresponds, but to martyrdom corresponds the beatitude which consists in the glorification of bodies, on account of the torments which they suffered. Or otherwise: the kingdom of heaven is promised to the poor in hope, because they do not fly away at once, but to the martyrs in reality, because they fly away at once.

[87565] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 11: "Blessed are you." Here he touches upon the dignity of those who are to teach the very doctrine of the apostles. And it should be known that all the beatitudes pertain to three things, since the first three are for the removal of evil, namely: blessed are the poor, blessed are the meek, and blessed are they who mourn; the other four are for the working of good; and the last pertains to the patient endurance of evil. Now these three ought to be present by excellence in the teacher of sacred Scripture, because in enduring evils he ought not only to bear them patiently but ought to rejoice; likewise he ought to remove evils from others; and thirdly he ought to enlighten unto good. Hence in these three he commends the apostolic dignity in order, and he begins from persecution, because by this the perfection of all the others is designated, and it signifies that no one ought to take up the office of preaching unless he is perfect, Proverbs 19:11: "The teaching of a man is known by patience," Psalm 91:15 (Vulgate): "They shall be well patient." Concerning this, then, he does three things: first he enumerates the evils they were about to suffer; second he teaches the manner of suffering: "Rejoice and be glad"; third he assigns the reason: "for your reward." Now evils are either present or absent; and present evils come about by word and by deed: hence he sets down the whole. He says therefore: "Blessed are you." But here Augustine raises a question, because first he says "when they shall curse you," and afterward "and speak all evil," which seem to be the same. But it should be known that those curse who bear reproach to one's face, but those speak all evil who slander the absent. For they curse those to whom many reproaches are made, Jeremiah 15:10: "All curse me," 1 Peter 2:23: "who, when he was cursed..." Blessed, therefore, when they shall curse you, that is, when they shall offend you by word and by deed. Chrysostom: the merit of eternal life consists in two things: in doing good and in enduring evil, and just as any good deed, however small, is not without merit, so every injury has its reward. "And persecuted," that is, by expelling you from city to city, 1 Corinthians 4:12: "We are cursed, and we bless," and below, 23:34: "Behold I send to you prophets and scribes, and some of them you shall persecute from city to city." "And shall speak," that is, they shall pierce you and defame you with many evils, 2 Corinthians 6:8: "as seducers," 1 Peter 4:14: "If you be reproached for the name of Christ." But it should be known that not all of whom evils are spoken are blessed, but it is required, first, that it be spoken falsely, and second, that it be for Christ's sake; hence he says "lying, for my sake," and this "for my sake" refers to all the aforesaid. Likewise note that what he says, "for my sake," is the same as what was said above, "for Christ's sake."

[87566] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 12: "Rejoice." Here he teaches the manner in which evils are to be endured. Above, when he was speaking of all in general, he said "blessed are they that suffer," that is, who are not indignant; but in the apostles this does not suffice — rather it is fitting that they should exult, James 1:2: "count it all joy," Acts 5:41: "the apostles went rejoicing." But against this, Augustine: "you command that these things be endured, not that they be loved." It must be said that one is not to rejoice over the tribulations themselves but over the hope which one has on account of enduring them, just as one who takes medicine does not rejoice over the bitterness of the medicine but over the hope of health. And he says "rejoice and be glad," where it should be known that to be delighted, to exult, to rejoice, and to be glad are the same thing in reality but differ in their notion. For delight properly arises from the conjunction with the very thing loved and fitting; joy consists not only in the conjunction but also in the apprehension of it; interior gladness and exultation are effects that follow upon joy and delight, because from these the heart is first dilated — hence "laetitia" (gladness) is as it were "latitia" (a widening); likewise, not only is the heart dilated within, but when it is expressed it appears outwardly, and then it is called exultation, as it were appearing outside. Now one must rejoice because it will be to the confusion of unbelievers and the joy of the faithful; thus blessed Lawrence rejoiced on the gridiron, as is read of him. And there is a twofold cause of joy: first, the reward, hence: "for your reward is abundant in heaven," namely in the Empyrean, hence 1 Thessalonians 4:16 (17): "so shall we always be with the Lord." Augustine: in saying "in heaven" he names both the object of beatitude and its substance, which will not be among bodily things but among spiritual things, namely in the enjoyment of God; and these spiritual goods are designated by the heavens on account of their solidity and firmness. And he says "abundant" on account of the superabundant reward of the apostles, Luke 6:38: "good measure," Genesis 15:1: "I am God, your reward." The second cause why one must rejoice is the example, hence: "for so." For it is a great consolation when some are likened to the great and preceding fathers, Acts 7:52: "Which of the prophets...," James 5:10: "Take, brethren, for an example..." And note that in this the dignity of Christ is designated, because he has his prophets suffering on his behalf just as in the Old Testament, and also the dignity of the apostles, who are likened to the prophets.

[87567] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 13: "You are the salt." Above, the Lord showed the dignity of the apostles as regards the fact that in tribulations they ought to be not only patient but even rejoicing; now, however, he states their excellence as regards the fact that they ought to restrain others from evils, and therefore he compares them to salt: "You are..." And concerning this he does two things: first he determines their office as regards restraining others from evils; second he shows how they ought to restrain themselves from evils, at the place: "But if the salt lose its savor." He says, therefore: "You are the salt." He compares them to salt for four reasons. The first, on account of the generation of salt, which comes from water and wind and the heat of the sun: for spiritual generation is from the water of Baptism and by the power of the Holy Spirit, John 3:5: "Unless a man be born again...," and from the heat of the sun, that is, the fervor of love which is from the Holy Spirit, Romans 5:5: "the charity of God..." Second, on account of the useful properties of salt, of which the first is use, since all things are seasoned with salt; hence it signifies the wisdom which apostolic men ought to have, Ecclesiasticus 6:23 (37:23): "the wisdom of teaching," Colossians 4:5: "in wisdom towards those that are without." The second reason was Leviticus 2:13, that salt was to be added to every sacrifice, because apostolic teaching ought to shine forth in every work of ours. The third is that it consumes the excess of moisture and thereby preserves from putrefaction: thus the apostles by their teaching restrained carnal concupiscences, 1 Peter 4:3: "the time past is sufficient," Romans 13:13: "not in rioting." The fourth effect is that it renders the earth barren: hence it is said that certain victors sowed salt over the city they had captured so that nothing might spring up there; so also the evangelical teaching makes the earth barren, so that earthly works may not spring up in us, Ephesians 5:11: "Have no fellowship..." The apostles, therefore, are called salt because they have a biting sharpness that draws men back from sins, Mark 9:49 (50): "Have salt in yourselves." But someone might say: it suffices that I have salt. No — rather it is necessary that the powers of salt preserve you from sin, and to this he adduces four reasons. The first is taken from incorrigibility, hence: "But if the salt lose its savor." Those things properly lose their savor which lose their own power: just as strong wine, when it loses its strength, so salt when it loses its bite, Mark 9:49 (50): "if the salt become unsavory, with what will you season it?" Hence someone loses his savor when he lies subject to sin, Romans 1:21: "they became vain in their thoughts." If, therefore, on account of tribulations or anything else you fall away from virtue, "with what will you be salted" — that is, with what other salt will it be salted? For if the common people sin they can be corrected, but if the prelate sins, no one can amend him, Hosea 8:5: "How long will they be unable..." And it should be noted that Luke 14:34 says: "But if the salt become tasteless" — for it is a great folly to give up eternal things for temporal ones. The second reason is taken from usefulness, hence: "good for nothing," and Luke 14:35 explains this: "neither for the land nor for the dunghill," because it makes the land barren and does not fertilize the dunghill. Thus spiritual men, when they sin, are worth nothing, because they are not fit even for secular affairs, as soldiers and the like are, Ezekiel 15:2: "Son of man, what shall be done to the wood of the vine?" etc., Psalm 13:3 (14:3): "They are all gone aside." The third reason is taken from the imminent danger and has two branches according to two dangers. The first is expulsion, hence: "except to be cast out," namely from the Church, Apocalypse 22:15: "Without are dogs..." Likewise, that the dignity of priestly teaching authority be taken from him, Hosea 4:6: "because you have rejected knowledge," below, 21:43: "the kingdom shall be taken from you," and this is: "except to be cast out." The second danger is degradation, because those who first live supernaturally and then fail become contemptible, and this is: "and to be trodden on," Luke 14:30: "This man began to build," Malachi 2:8: "You have departed out of the way, and have caused many to stumble at the law." And it should be noted, according to Augustine, that if certain holy men are held in contempt, as is said above (5:11): "and shall speak all evil," etc., they can nevertheless never be trodden underfoot, because they always have their heart in heaven, and it is properly those who are trodden underfoot who lie upon the earth.

[87568] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 14: "You are the light." Here the third dignity of the apostles is set down. For just as they ought to restrain others from evils, so they ought also to enlighten. And concerning this he does two things: first he shows their dignity, second he removes faint-heartedness, at the place: "A city cannot..." He says, therefore: "You are the light of the world" — as if to say, not of Judea only, or Galilee, but of the whole world, Acts 13:47: "For so the Lord has commanded us: I have set you to be a light to the Gentiles." And this was a marvel, that he was scarcely known in his own land and yet he went forth into every land. But it is objected that this saying, "light," seems to belong to Christ alone, John 1:8: "He was not the light," and afterward: "that was the true light." It must be said that Christ alone is light essentially, but the apostles are called light illuminated, namely by participation, just as the eye is a light that illuminates and yet is itself illuminated. And note that these three sayings — namely, "Blessed are you when they shall curse you," and "You are the salt," and "You are the light" — seem to pertain to the three last beatitudes: the first to "Blessed are they that suffer persecution," the second to "Blessed are the peacemakers" (because they make peace in themselves and in others), the third to "Blessed are the clean of heart." For if the apostles were excellent in these last three, much more so in the higher ones. The Lord had said: "Blessed are you when they shall curse you" and "they that suffer persecution"; they might therefore say: we shall endure so many persecutions, therefore we wish to hide ourselves. And therefore the Lord next removes their faint-heartedness, hence: "A city cannot be hidden." And first he forbids hiding, second he shows the manner in which they ought to manifest themselves, at the place: "so let your light shine." That they ought not to hide themselves he proves by two reasons: first, because they could not even if they wished; second, because they ought not, and this is: "neither do men light..." "A city cannot..." The city was the congregation of the faithful, namely the very company of the apostles, Psalm 86:3 (87:3): "Glorious things are said of you." Now it was situated "upon a mountain," namely Christ, Micah 4:1: "the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be...," Daniel 2:34: "a stone cut out..." Or "upon a mountain," that is, upon the perfection of justice, Psalm 35:7 (36:6): "Your justice is like the mountains." Now a city situated upon a mountain cannot hide itself, and so it is with the apostles: Chrysostom. Men set in a lowly place, if they sin, can lie hidden; but if set upon the summit, they cannot, 3 Kings 1:20: "the eyes of all Israel are upon you." Hilary explains it differently, though the sense is nearly the same: the city upon the mountain is Christ, because on the part of the human nature by which he communicates with us, he is a city, Jeremiah 1:18: "I have made you this day into a fortified city"; he is upon a mountain because he is in the divinity which is the mountain, Psalm 67:16 (68:15): "the mountain of God, a fat mountain." And therefore Christ could not lie hidden; and therefore you, apostles, ought not to hide me.

[87569] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 15. Second, at the place: "neither do men light...," as if to say: let us grant that it could lie hidden, still you ought not to hide it. For no one who receives a benefit ought to act against the intention of the giver. God gave you knowledge so that you might share it, 1 Peter 4:10: "as every man has received grace..." And this is: "neither do men light a lamp" — men, that is, or the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. By "lamp" can be understood, first, the evangelical teaching, Psalm 118:105 (119:105): "a lamp to my feet"; for a lamp has an incorporated light; the light of truth has been placed in sacred Scripture, and it has been lit by the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Or by "lamp" can be understood the apostles, insofar as the light of grace has been placed within them, John 5:35: "he was a burning lamp," Psalm 130:17 (132:17): "I have prepared a lamp." Or by "lamp," Christ, because just as a lamp is light in an earthen vessel, so is divinity in humanity, 2 Kings 22:29: "You are my lamp." The lamp being understood in this way, by "bushel" we can understand three things. First, according to Augustine, bodily things, for two reasons: the first, because a bushel is a measure, Deuteronomy 25:15; but what we do in the body will be repaid to us, 2 Corinthians 5:10: "we must all appear..."; or because all bodily things are measured, but divine things are infinite, since they are beyond measure. Those, therefore, put the lamp under the bushel who refer their teaching to temporal advantage, since that is held more precious; against which the Apostle says, 1 Thessalonians 2:5: "For neither have we been..." In a second way, according to Chrysostom, worldly men are called the bushel, because they are empty above and solid below: for above they have unsoundness, since they perceive nothing of the Holy Spirit, 1 Corinthians 2:14: "the sensual man...," but below, that is, in secular affairs, they are wise, Luke 16:8: "the children of this world"; and this is the more literal exposition. Then, therefore, according to this, the lamp is put under the bushel when the teaching is hidden out of worldly fear, Isaiah 51:12: "Who are you, that you should be afraid of a man?," 2 Timothy 2:9: "I labor even unto bonds." But if by "lamp" is understood the evangelical teaching or Christ, then by "bushel" can be understood the synagogue: for Christ was not incarnate for this reason, that he might lie hidden beneath Judea, but that he might manifest himself to the whole world, Isaiah 49:6: "I have given you for a light." "But upon a candlestick." This can be explained in three ways, because by "candlestick" can be signified the body, and by "lamp," the evangelical teaching; hence "bushel" and "candlestick" mean the same thing, as if to say: the evangelical teaching ought not to be subjected to temporal things, but all things ought to be at its service; hence when you give up possessions, your body, and even your life unto death for the love of Christ, then you put the lamp upon the candlestick. Or by "candlestick" is understood the Church, because those who are the lamp are set in a higher place, Ecclesiasticus 26:22 (17): "a shining lamp." But if it is understood of Christ, then by "candlestick": the cross, Colossians 1:20: "through the blood of the cross." "That it may give light to all." This too is explained in three ways. By "house" the Church can be understood, 1 Timothy 3:15: "that you may know how you ought to behave..." Or the house is the whole world, Hebrews 3:4: "for every house is built by some man..." etc.

[87570] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 16. Next is set down the manner in which they ought to manifest themselves, and first he sets down the manner: that they ought to shine before men, by enlightening them, Ephesians 3:8: "To me, the least of all the saints..."; the order: "that they may see," James 2:18: "show me from your works"; the end, because it is not for their own glory, 2 Corinthians 2:17: "we are not as many...," and this is: "and may glorify"; for we ought to do good works for the glory of God, so that God may be glorified in our good life, 1 Corinthians 10:31: "whether you eat..." etc.

[87571] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 17: "Do not think." Note here that the Lord fulfilled the law in five ways: first, because those things which had been prefigured he himself fulfilled in deed, Luke 22:37: "it is necessary that it be fulfilled"; second, by observing the precepts of the law, Galatians 4:4: "when the fullness of time had come"; third, by working through grace, namely in sanctifying through the Holy Spirit, which the law was not able to do, Romans 8:3: "for what was impossible..."; fourth, by making satisfaction for the sins by which we had been made transgressors of the law — hence, the transgression having been removed, he fulfilled the law, Romans 3:25: "whom God proposed as a propitiation"; fifth, by adding to the law certain perfections which either belonged to the understanding of the law, or were for the greater perfection of justice. Note that the law is broken in three ways: by denying it entirely, or by wrongly interpreting it, or by not fulfilling the moral precepts. "Do not think." The beatitude to which the teaching of Christ pertains having been set down, here he begins to promulgate his teaching, and first he lays open his intention, second he proposes the rule and precepts of his teaching, at the place: "But I say to you." Concerning the first he does two things: first he excludes the intention that was supposed, second he sets forth the true one, at the place: "I have not come." The Lord had said to the apostles (5:11): "Blessed shall you be when they shall curse you," etc.; hence the apostles might have suspected that such a teaching was about to be handed down, on account of which they would need to hide themselves, as if Christ were saying something against the law; and therefore the Lord excludes this, saying: "Do not," etc. And likewise, because it might be said that no other prophet, after Moses who gave the law, has broken the law, the Lord therefore says he will do something greater, hence: "but to fulfill"; for no one had fulfilled it. And note that this saying is very effective against those who condemn the law as if it were from the Devil, 1 John 3:8: "in this the Son of God appears"; but he himself confesses: "I have not come to destroy the law"; therefore it is not the work of the Devil. By this argument a certain man was converted to the faith and became a Friar Preacher. Hence the Manichees very much abhor this chapter; hence Faustus raises many objections, according to Augustine, and all the objections are reduced to three. First, from the authority of the law: for it is said, Deuteronomy 4:2: "you shall not add to the word which I speak to you, nor take away from it"; but Christ added; therefore he acted against the law. Likewise, Hebrews 8:13: "in saying a new one, he has made the former old"; but Christ said he was the founder of a new law, below 26:28: "this is my blood"; therefore he destroyed the old one. Third, John 13:15: "for I have given you an example"; every action of Christ, therefore, is a true instruction; if therefore he fulfilled it, we too ought to fulfill it: therefore we ought to be circumcised and observe all the legal precepts; and this objection is common also to the Nazarenes and the Manichees. Faustus said, therefore, either that Jesus did not say these words, but Matthew — who was not present at the discourse — said them, while John, who was present, did not say them; or that if Christ did say them and Matthew wrote them, the Gospel must be explained differently. For in sacred Scripture the law is explained in three ways: as the Mosaic law (Romans 7:6: "we are delivered from the law of death, in the law of God"); the law of nature (Romans 2:14: "for when the Gentiles, who have not the law..."); the law of truth (Romans 8:2: "the law of the spirit... has come"). Thus it is proved in three ways, therefore: of the old law, of the law of nature (Titus 1:12: "one of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, The Cretans..."), of truth (below 23:34: "behold I send..."). What he says here, therefore, "I have not come," etc., must be understood of the law of nature or of truth, which also comes to be in certain of the ancient fathers; and a sign of this is that the Lord, when he was speaking of the precepts, seemed to approve some and not others, namely those which are proper to the Mosaic law, such as "an eye for an eye" and the like. But against these things Augustine objects as follows. First, because whoever denies something of the Gospel will be able, by the same reasoning, to deny anything else whatsoever, and so annul Scripture; but the faithful man ought to believe whatever things are in Scripture. Likewise, what he says — that Christ speaks of another law and prophets — is false, because in the whole New Testament, wherever mention is made of the law, it is understood of the Mosaic law, Romans 9:4: "whose is the giving of the law"; therefore the Lord too speaks of these. Hence we must see first how Christ came to fulfill the law, and afterward we shall resolve the arguments. It must be known, then, that Christ fulfilled the law and the prophets in five ways. First, because those things which had been prefigured in the law and the prophets concerning Christ, he fulfilled in deed, Luke 24:44: "it is necessary that all things be fulfilled." Second, by observing the legal precepts to the letter, Galatians 4:4: "when the fullness of time came." Third, by working grace, which the law of nature was not able to do: for every law aims at this, that we be made just men; but Christ did this through the Holy Spirit, Romans 8:3: "for what was impossible to the law." Fourth, according to Augustine, by making satisfaction for the sins according to which we had been made transgressors of the law; hence, the transgression having been removed, he is said to have fulfilled the law, Romans 3:25: "whom God proposed as a propitiation," etc. Fifth, by adding to the law certain perfections which either belonged to the understanding of the law or were for the greater perfection of justice, Hebrews 7:19: "the law brought nothing to perfection"; and this appears to be Christ's intention, because when he has already made mention of all the legal precepts, he adds: "Be you therefore perfect," etc. (Matthew 5:48). Let us resolve, then, the arguments of Faustus as Augustine resolves them. To that saying (Deuteronomy 4:2), "you shall not add to the word," it must be said that Christ did not add but explained; for they understood "you shall not kill" of the act of homicide, whereas Christ explains that he also forbade hatred and anger. Likewise, to that saying (Hebrews 8:13), "the new has made the old obsolete," it must be said that this "new" is the same thing, because the old was the figure and the new is the fulfillment of the figures. To the point that we ought to observe it, it must be said that something can be signified by speech and by figure, and it makes no difference in whatever way it is signified. Before Christ was born, one could have said: Christ is to be born and to die; but now it is said: Christ has been born, and the like; and yet the thing is in agreement, because the same accomplished and future reality is pronounced in different words. Hence that which was signified by figures as future, when it has already passed, is signified as present through new figures, namely the sacraments of the new law. Hence, although Christ has fulfilled it, nevertheless, because the truth has now come, whoever would still fulfill it in the old way would do an injury to the truth. Thus, then, is "I have not come to destroy" to be understood.

[87572] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 18: "For amen." Here is set down the reason for the fulfillment, and he seems to assign a threefold reason: the first from the immutability of the law, the second from the penalty of those who break it, the third from the reward of those who fulfill it; the second at the place: "shall break," the third at the place: "shall do and teach." He says, therefore, "amen," and it should be known that in the old law all the mysteries of Christ were prefigured, but, as is said in Amos 3:7, the Lord does nothing without revealing it; the mysteries of Christ, therefore, will endure to the very last end, below at the end (28:20): "behold I am with you." Hence not all the mysteries of the prophets were fulfilled at Christ's first coming; rather they will be fulfilled up to the end of the world. And what he has said cannot be changed, Numbers 23:19: "has the Lord said, and will he not do it?" If, therefore, the law foretold things that are future, it is also necessary that they come to pass of necessity. Hence he says: "amen I say," that is, all things will be fulfilled successively up to the end of the world. It should be known that "amen" is a Hebrew word, and no translator, out of reverence for this term — since the Lord frequently used it — has dared to change it; and it is taken sometimes in the force of a noun, whence "amen": true; sometimes it is an adverb, that is, truly, and it is taken in this way here; sometimes it stands for "let it be done," as in the Psalm (40:14 [41:13]) where what we render "let it be" is in Hebrew "amen"; hence the verse is said: for "true," "truly"; for "let it be done," "amen" is said. Hence the Lord here rouses attention in his hearers. "Till it pass" — not according to substance, but according to disposition, 1 Corinthians 7:31: "the figure of this world passes away," 2 Peter 3:12: "the heavens being on fire." "Till," that is, up to the end of the world. "Jot." "Jot" among the Greeks is the letter which we call small I; among the Hebrews, however, it is called "yod"; and among the Greeks "iota" signifies the letter Y, and is a new letter (for all the letters signify some number), so it pertains to the completeness of the Decalogue, and perhaps for this reason he set down "iota" rather than "yod," according to what the saints say. The "point," or accent-mark, is placed above letters both in Hebrew and in Greek, but for different reasons in each: because among the Hebrews the aleph sometimes sounds as "a," sometimes as "e," and this is known by certain points, and those are called apices; likewise among the Greeks certain marks are placed above letters to distinguish breathings and accents, and these too are called apices among the Greeks. The Lord wishes to say, therefore, that nothing however small will fail to be fulfilled.

[87573] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 19: "Whosoever therefore shall break." Here the second reason is set down, taken from the punishment of those who break the law, as if to say: whoever shall break it will be held guilty of punishment as a transgressor of the divine observance. Now the least commandments, according to Chrysostom, are the commandments of Christ; hence: "whosoever shall break one of these least commandments" which I am about to speak. And the continuity is thus: because the law cannot be broken, therefore, since I do not break it, whoever shall break it will be held guilty of punishment. And they are called least, first, on account of humility, just as he also calls himself a little one, below 18:3: "unless you become..."; or they are called least with respect to the transgression, because he sins less who breaks them; but greater are the things which Christ commanded with regard to observance, because the law commanded "you shall not kill," Christ, not even to be angry. Augustine and Jerome say it differently: he speaks to the letter of the least precepts which are in the law, because he said "jot and tittle"; and they are called least because the principal ones are: "you shall love the Lord your God" and "your neighbor"; hence certain observances are called the least precepts, such as the many that are in Leviticus 19. And he says this as a rebuke of the Pharisees, because the Pharisees, on account of their own observances, transgressed many things, below 15:6: "you have made void." Now the law is broken in three ways: first, by denying it entirely; second, by wrongly interpreting it; third, by not fulfilling the moral precepts. "And shall teach." He does evil who acts wrongly, but he does worse who teaches others to act wrongly, Apocalypse 2:14: "you have there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam"; and therefore he says: "whoever shall break and teach," namely, teach others to break the commandments. And according to this it seems that he who breaks them will be in the kingdom of heaven. But it should be known that, according to Augustine, the kingdom of heaven is here taken for eternal life, and the Lord wished to give us to understand that no one will be there who breaks and teaches, etc., because there will be no one there who is not great, Romans 8:30: "whom he justified," etc.; hence he who is too small will never enter. Second, according to Rabanus, thus: men seek fame among men, because it is a certain glory for a man to be reputed great in the kingdom of men; but whoever breaks the commandments will be reputed least in the kingdom of heaven, not existing there at all: for he is reputed small there who transgresses the commandments, and least who teaches others to transgress; and this explanation is good enough. Chrysostom explains it differently: Scripture sometimes calls the final judgment the kingdom of heaven, as the Psalm says (96:1 [97:1]): "the Lord has reigned"; and there there will be different ranks, but the least will be he who teaches men to transgress the commandments, because, according to this, even those who are in Hell belong to the kingdom of heaven. Gregory: on behalf of the Church, hence: he will be called least in the Church, because when a man's life is despised, it follows that his preaching too is held in contempt. "But he that shall do and teach." Great is he who does well, but greater is he who both does and teaches; hence he will have great glory, below 10:32: "whoever shall confess me," Wisdom 19:22 (19:20 Vulgate): "in all things you have magnified your people."

[87574] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 20: "But I say to you, unless it abound." Above the Lord showed that it was not his intention to destroy the law but to fulfill it; hence here he begins to fulfill it. In the law there were four kinds of precepts: certain moral precepts, certain judicial ones, certain figural ones, and certain promises; three of these the Lord fulfills in words — namely the moral, the promissory, and the judicial, that is, he teaches how they are to be fulfilled; the figural ones, however, he fulfilled in deed, in his passion. Hence this part is divided into three: in the first he fulfills the law as regards the moral precepts, in the second as regards the promises, in the third as regards the judicial precepts; the moral precepts are of two kinds: some prohibitive, some permissive; first he fulfills the former, second the latter, at the place: "it was said" (5:31). Concerning the first he does two things: first he forbids homicide, second adultery, at the place (5:27): "You have heard," etc., "You shall not commit adultery." Concerning the first he does two things: first he sets down the necessity, second the fulfillment, at the place: "You have heard." He says, therefore: "But I say to you." Note that justice is taken in two ways: sometimes it is a certain particular virtue, one of the four cardinal virtues, and has a determined subject-matter, namely the exchangeable goods which come into the use of life; otherwise it is called the general virtue, which is the common virtue that the Philosopher calls legal justice, which pertains to the fulfilling of the law: and it is taken in this way here. "And more than that of the scribes." And he says: "of the scribes and Pharisees," because these were the more prominent in the justice of the law, since they even added certain further observances of their own; therefore, in order to designate the excellence of the New Testament, he shows that it surpasses even their justice. Hence it is said that whoever is less will be in the kingdom of heaven, that is, the Church is greater than that. The sense, therefore, is: "unless it abound," that is, unless your justice be more perfect than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter, etc. And it should be known that the state of the Gospel is a middle state between the state of the law and the state of glory, and this is clear because in Galatians 4:3 the Apostle compares the state of the law to a child, and the Gospel to a perfect age; hence he says: "as long as we were children," etc., and afterward (3:24): "the law was our pedagogue," etc., and 1 Corinthians 13:11: "when I was a child," etc.; it is, therefore, a middle state, and this is natural, because no one can arrive at one term unless he passes beyond another: for no one can arrive at old age unless he passes beyond childhood; thus the Lord says that one cannot arrive at the state of the kingdom of heaven unless one passes beyond, etc. Likewise, a greater reward is acquired for greater labor, 2 Corinthians 9:6: "he who sows sparingly..."; now in the law temporal and earthly things were promised, Isaiah 1:19: "if you be willing...," but here heavenly things are promised; therefore justice ought to abound in us, because a greater reward is expected. But it is objected against this saying of the Lord, "unless it abound," that the justice of the law consists in the fulfilling of the Decalogue; but he who fulfills the precepts of the Decalogue will have eternal life, below 19:17: "if you will enter into life..." And it is resolved thus: it is said universally, first, that the observers of the Decalogue were never able to enter except by faith and through the redemption of the blood of Christ (Galatians 2:21): "for if justice be by the law..." And therefore it must be said that the saying "if you will enter into life" is to be understood with faith presupposed; but the scribes and Pharisees did not have faith, Romans 9:31: "but Israel, by following after the law of justice, has not attained to the law of justice. Why? Because," etc.; and this is a solution good enough. Another is Augustine's, who says that all these fulfillments which Christ makes are all contained already in the old law, since there too anger is forbidden, Leviticus 19:17: "you shall not hate your brother." What, then, does the Lord add? It must be said that he adds with respect to the depraved understanding of those scribes and Pharisees, since they believed that in that precept, "you shall not kill," nothing was forbidden except from fear of the act, the act of homicide. Hence the Lord explained this, and therefore he does not simply say "unless your justice abound beyond the law," but "more than that of the scribes and Pharisees." There is also another solution, with Augustine: for Christ had said, "whoever shall do and teach," etc., and "whoever shall break," etc.; but the Pharisees and scribes do not both do and teach, below chapter 23: "for they say," etc.; therefore "unless it abound," etc., means: that what you say, you also do. "You shall not enter," etc. But another question remains, because the Lord said, "whosoever therefore shall break" one of the least commandments "shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven," and yet he who does not abound shall not enter; therefore he who breaks the commandments will nonetheless be there. And Chrysostom resolves this by saying that to be in the kingdom is one thing and to enter it is another: for those properly enter who have a share in the dominion of the kingdom; those are said to be in it who simply dwell within it, wherever that may be — hence even those who are held in prison are said to be in the kingdom; so also it is with the kingdom of heaven, because those brought to punishment are in the kingdom but do not share in the kingdom. Augustine explains it differently, and says that from this we can understand that the kingdom of heaven is spoken of in two ways: one, which those who lack justice do not enter, and this is eternal life; the other, which those who break the commandments do enter, and this is the present Church.

[87575] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 21: "You have heard." Here is set down the fulfillment of the precept, and concerning this he does three things: first he sets down the precepts, second he fulfills them, third he warns to the observance of the fulfillment; the second at the place: "but I say," the third at the place: "if therefore you offer." Concerning the first he does two things: first he sets down the precepts about the prohibition of homicide, second the penalty for homicide. He says, therefore: "you have heard" this, Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17, and he says "by them of old," because, according to Chrysostom, just as if a teacher says to one of his disciples: it is a long time since I taught you the elements, it is time that you learn greater things, so does the Lord, Hebrews 5:12: "for whereas for the time you ought to be masters," etc. And it should be noted that concerning this precept a threefold error arises. For some said that it was not lawful to kill even the small animals; but this is false, since it is not a sin to make use of those things which are subjected to man's power: for it is the natural order that plants be for the nourishment of animals, and certain animals for the nourishment of others; and all things are for man's nourishment, Genesis 9:3: "even as the green herbs." And the Philosopher too says in the Politics that hunting is like a just war. The second is the error of certain ones who said "you shall not kill" means a human being; hence they call all secular judges who condemn men according to certain laws murderers. Against this Augustine says that God did not take away from himself the power of killing, hence (Deuteronomy 32:39): "I will kill and I will make to live," etc.; therefore it is lawful for those to kill who do so by the command of God, because then it is God who acts. Now every law is a command of God, Proverbs 8:15: "by me kings reign," Romans 13:4: "for he beareth not the sword without cause"; therefore "you shall not kill" must be understood: on one's own authority. The third error is that some believed that "you shall not kill another" but that it is lawful to kill oneself, since this is found recorded of Samson and also of Cato and of certain virgins who threw themselves into the flames, according to what Augustine recounts. But Augustine replied that whoever kills himself kills a human being, since one ought not to kill another except by the authority of God, nor oneself either except by the will of God or the instinct of the Holy Spirit, and thus he excuses Samson. "But whosoever shall kill." Here the penalty is set down: "he shall be liable to judgment," that is, to the penalty which the law will adjudge, Exodus 21:12.

[87576] On Matthew, chapter 5, verse 22. There follows: "But I say to you," etc. The precept of the old law having been set down, here the Lord fulfills it, and this fulfillment does not empty out the law but rather makes for its greater fulfillment, because he who is angry is prone to homicide, though when he is angry he does not yet commit homicide. This is in a certain way contained already in that precept, because that law was given by God, and there is a difference between the law of man and the law of God, because man is the judge of external acts, but God of internal ones, 1 Kings 16:7: "man sees those things that appear"; hence in this "you shall not kill" the very movement toward killing is also included. But there is a twofold movement toward harming one's neighbor, namely of anger and of hatred; nor is hatred the same as inveterate anger, but it is spoken of by way of cause, since hatred arises out of inveterate anger. There is, then, a difference, because anger does not desire evil to one's neighbor except insofar as it wills vengeance — hence, once vengeance is exacted, it comes to rest; but in hatred the harm itself is willed for its own sake and the desire never comes to rest; therefore the movement of hatred is graver than that of anger. Now God forbids not only the movement of hatred but also that of anger, which is lighter, 1 John 2:11: "he that hates his brother." Now he sets down three degrees of anger: the first degree is of anger latent in the heart, the second of anger appearing outwardly, the third of anger bursting forth into harm. The first is at the place: "but I say to you," and Augustine says that the reading ought to be "without cause," since he who is angry without cause will be liable to judgment. Jerome, however, says that "without cause" does not belong to the text, because then a place would be left for anger; but the Lord leaves no place at all for anger. But is all anger contrary to virtue? It should be known that, as Augustine says, there were two opinions of the philosophers on this point: the Stoics said that no passion of the soul falls upon the wise man, indeed they wished true virtue to exclude passion altogether; the Peripatetics, however, said that anger does fall upon the wise man, but moderated, and this is the truer opinion; which is clear both by authority, because in the Gospels we find these passions in a certain way attributed to Christ, in whom was the fullness of wisdom; and by reason, because if all the passions were contrary to virtue, there would be certain powers of the soul that would serve only for harm, since they would have no fitting acts of their own, and then the irascible and concupiscible powers would have been given to man in vain. And therefore it must be said that anger is sometimes a virtue and sometimes not. Now anger is taken in three ways: first, as it lies in the judgment of reason alone, without any disturbance of the soul; and this is not called anger but judgment — thus the Lord, punishing the wicked, is described as appearing angry, Micah 7:9: "I will bear the wrath of the Lord." Second, it is taken as it is a passion, and this is in the sensitive appetite, and it is twofold, because sometimes it is ordered by reason and contained within the bounds of reason — namely when one is angry as much as one ought, at whom one ought, and the like — and then it is an act of virtue and is called anger through zeal. Hence the Philosopher too says that meekness does not consist in never being angry at all. And therefore Chrysostom says that if anger were entirely taken away, discipline too would be taken away, etc. This anger, therefore, is not a sin. There is a third anger which escapes the judgment of reason, and this is always a sin, but sometimes venial, sometimes mortal, and this will be said to arise from the very worst impulse. For something is a mortal or venial sin in two ways: from its kind, or from its circumstances, or in the act and by consent; for example, homicide is an act of mortal sin from its very kind, because it is directly contrary to the divine precept, and therefore consent to homicide is a mortal sin — because if the act is mortal, so too is the consent; likewise if it were a venial sin, so too would be the consent, and so on. Sometimes, however, a sin is mortal from its kind, but nevertheless the mere impulse is not a mortal sin because it lacks consent, as when the movement of concupiscence arises toward fornication: if it is not consented to, it is not mortal. Likewise, anger is a movement toward avenging an injury inflicted — for this is properly anger; if, then, this movement, for example in the matter of homicide, remains only in the passion, such that reason too is drawn along with it, then it is a mortal sin; but if reason is not perverted, then it is venial. But if the movement is not, from its kind, a mortal sin, then even if consent is given to it, it is not mortal. What the Lord says, then — "whosoever is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment" — must be understood of the movement tending toward harm, which movement is a mortal sin provided it is with consent, Ecclesiastes 12:14: "all things that are done, he will bring..." etc. And this is: "but I," etc. And note that no prophet, speaking of the law of Moses, spoke in this way, "but I say," etc., but they only led men to the observance of the law of Moses. From this it is clear that the Lord shows that he has authority and shows himself to be a lawgiver when he says "but I," etc. Next is set down the second degree of anger, namely when it appears outwardly without the infliction of harm. "Raca," according to some, is not a word signifying any determinate concept but is an interjection of one who is angry. According to Augustine, it is like "alas," an interjection of one who grieves, and signifies a certain feeling; hence the anger already bursts forth outwardly, yet not into harm. According to Chrysostom, it is an interjection of one who holds another in contempt, and sounds a note of contempt. Now both of these are forbidden, namely both to show bitterness toward one's brother — the Apostle (Ephesians 4:31): "let all bitterness..." — and to despise him, Malachi 2:10: "why does he despise," etc. According to others it is a word signifying a determinate concept, and on this point there are two opinions: for, according to Augustine, it is the same as "ragged," from "rachos," and this opinion agrees with that of Chrysostom; according to Jerome, "raca" signifies "empty," hence "raca," as it were "without a brain," and this is a great injury — indeed it is done as an injury to the Holy Spirit when one calls a wise brother, full of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4: "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit"), empty, etc. But Chrysostom asks: if "empty" is the same as "foolish," why did the Lord afterward say, "but whosoever shall say, You fool"? And he answered that in every language there are words signifying injury, but the injury arises from usage and the custom of speaking: for "raca," although it is the same as "fool," is nevertheless not used in the same way, since "raca" is said familiarly; and it is a sin when it is said with anger. "He shall be liable to the council." Augustine: it is a greater thing before God to be liable to the council than to judgment, because judgment applies while the case of the accused is still being examined and it is doubtful whether he is guilty, 1 Timothy 5:21: "without... judgment"; but after he is convicted of the crime, no more is done with the accused, but the judges betake themselves to council concerning the penalty to be imposed. Hilary: he is liable to the council of the saints, because he who does injury to the Holy Spirit deserves to be condemned by the saints. Chrysostom says that the apostles explained it thus: liable to the council, that is, so that he is known to those who came together in council against Christ. "But whosoever shall say, You fool." Here is the third degree, which is when one inflicts harm by word. And just as he who says "raca" inflicts injury upon the Holy Spirit, so he who says "fool" inflicts it upon the Son of God, who was made unto us wisdom, 1 Corinthians 1:30. "He shall be liable to the fire of hell (Gehenna)." This is the first place where mention is made of Gehenna, such that no one had ever before used this word. Jeremiah 19: near Jerusalem there was a certain pleasant valley called the valley of Topheth, or of the sons of Ennon; in that valley the children of Israel worshipped idols, and God threatened them through Jeremiah that in that place their own corpses would be cast down, hence Jeremiah 19:6: "this place shall be called," etc. Gehenna, according to the Hebrews, is the same as the valley of Ennon. Because, then, many were cast down and slain in that valley by Nebuchadnezzar when they were coming down from Jerusalem, therefore the Lord calls Gehenna the place of Hell. For just as he changed the earthly promises which were in the old law into heavenly and eternal goods, so he changed the temporal punishments which the old law inflicted into eternal punishments. Now, just as the faults themselves stand in relation to one another — since it is a greater thing to show anger outwardly than to hold it within, and a still greater thing to inflict harm — so too, first there is judgment, second the council, third a determinate penalty; and all of these, namely judgment, council, Gehenna, signify the punishment of Hell. And he says "in many ways" because he shows thereby a diversity of punishments, since those who inflict harm will be punished more severely.

"If therefore you offer." Here he forbids inveterate anger, from which hatred is born, and he argues from the greater, according to Rabanus, thus: if it is not lawful for you to be angry with your brother, much more is it not lawful to retain anger, whence hatred is born. Therefore "if you offer," that is, if you propose to offer, "at the altar."

This is explained in many ways, according as "altar" is sometimes taken for the material temple, as in Psalm 25:6: "I will wash my hands among the innocent, and I will encompass your altar, O Lord." Sometimes it is taken for Christ; Lamentations 2:7: "The Lord has cast off his altar," that is, Christ, namely in the Passion. Sometimes for the devotion of the heart, and this is the interior temple, according to Augustine. As to the first, "if you offer your gift," that is, your oblation, "at the altar" — the material altar, taken literally; or the gift of a good work, according to the Gloss, "at the altar," that is, Christ. Or, according to Augustine: "your gift," that is, prayers, Psalms, hymns, and the like, "at the altar," that is, in the heart, which is the temple where you are about to offer; and "there," namely in the Church, or in the heart, "you remember that your brother has something against you."

This can be understood in two ways, namely concerning the one who injures and the one who is injured. Concerning the one who injures, thus, according to Augustine: "if you remember," that is, if it comes into your mind and to your knowledge, that "your brother," whom you have injured, "has something against you" — namely on account of the disposition of an insult, of bodily injury, of the taking away of temporal goods, of the blackening of reputation — "leave there," namely before the altar, or before God, "your gift, and go": if he is absent, not with the feet of the body, as Augustine says, but you should prostrate yourself in humble mind in the sight of him to whom you are about to offer; if he is present, he must be called back to love, by seeking pardon from him. Or, if "your brother," who injured you, "has something against you," that is, whereby he is set against you, "go to be reconciled to your brother," by giving up your rancor toward him. For from the very fact that, in saying "if your brother has something against you," he does not add "justly," he gives us to understand that even the one to whom the injury was done ought to seek friendship. Hence Chrysostom says: if for the glory of your salvation the Lord commands you to make friendship, much more ought you to ask for it, so that you may attain a double glory: one, because you are innocent; the other, because you asked first. "And then, coming" — as one now pleasing to the Lord, whereas before you did not please him — "you shall offer your gift." Chrysostom: if you have offended in thought, be reconciled in thought; if in words, in words; if in deeds, in deeds. And again: unless you appease by deeds the one whom you have injured by deeds, you pray to the Lord in vain, you give alms in vain from the things by which you have despoiled others. For what does it profit if one man prays to the Lord for you, and another cries out to the Lord against you? Ecclesiasticus 34:23: "The Most High does not approve the gifts of the wicked."

And note here four things which are required for the giving or offering: first, cheerfulness of mind; hence he says "if you offer"; Ecclesiasticus 35:11: "In every gift make your countenance cheerful." Second, ownership of the thing; hence he says "your gift"; Proverbs 3:9: "Honor God with your substance." Third, the fitness of the place, "at the altar." Fourth, love of neighbor; hence he says "and you remember"; 1 Corinthians 13:3: "If I distribute all my goods to feed the poor, but have not charity, it profits me nothing." He is foolish who loses an abundance of food for the sake of a penny's worth of salt, that is, of charity, which gives savor and beauty to all things, as gold does to other metals.

"Be at agreement with your adversary." Above he forbade having anger, or discord, with one's brothers; here he removes having discord with an adversary, saying "be agreeing," that is, benevolent or kindly — as is gathered from the Greek, as Jerome says — "with your adversary." An objection: the Devil is an adversary; therefore one must agree with him. Response: he speaks of the one who is with us on the way; but the Devil is not on the way, nor can he be, but is in eternal straying from the way; hence "your adversary," according to Chrysostom, means a man who opposes, or literally an enemy; Romans 12:18: "If it be possible, as much as is in you, having peace with all men." "While," that is, until, "you are with him in the way," that is, in the state of meriting; John 9:4: "The time is coming when no one can work." Or our adversary is God, of whom Exodus 23:7 says: "I am the Lord, who am an adversary to the wicked." Or it is the divine word, which is opposed to those willing to sin; 2 Timothy, penultimate chapter, 16: "All Scripture, divinely inspired, is useful for teaching, for reproving." Or it is the remorseful conscience, of which Psalm 49:21 says: "I will reprove you, and set myself against your face." And thus, again, it is explained according to all these ways. Hence, "be agreeing with your adversary," that is, with God, and with the divine word, according to Augustine and Bede, with whom one must agree in the hope of the promise, in the fear of punishment, in the carrying out of the precept, in the avoidance of what is forbidden. "Quickly," that is, without delay; Ecclesiasticus 5:8: "Do not delay to be converted to the Lord." "While you are with him," that is, with him with whom you shall walk rightly "in the way," namely the way of Christ, or of penance, or of the world; Psalm 118:32: "I have run the way of your commandments, when you enlarged my heart."

"Lest perhaps he deliver you." According to Augustine, "lest perhaps" means lest it become, as it were by occasion, the cause of your being delivered up. And he says "perhaps," according to the Gloss, lest the place of repentance be taken away. For if the adversary had died before he agreed — or had been well-disposed — it would seem that he would be condemned, were it said simply and without qualification, "lest the adversary" — that is, the divine word, or God, or the remorseful conscience — "deliver you to the judge." The Gloss: into the hands of Christ. John 5:22: "he has given all judgment to the Son." And "the judge" is Christ; Jeremiah 29:23: "I am the judge, and the witness." "Deliver you to the officer": the Gloss says, that is, to the Angel who gathers the tares in order to seize them, below, chapter 13; Psalm 103:4: "who makes his Angels spirits." Or "to the officer," that is, to the Devil, the exactor; Isaiah 14:4: "How has the exactor ceased?" "And you be cast into prison," that is, into the abyss of Hell; Isaiah 24:22: "they shall be shut up in prison"; Revelation 20:3: "he cast him into the abyss, and shut him up."

"Amen I say to you," that is, know for certain, that you shall not go out from there, "until" — the Gloss: that is, never. Hence Augustine: "until" does not here signify the end of the punishment, but the continuation of the misery. As if he were to say: you shall always be paying, and never fully pay off; as in Psalm 109:1: "Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool," that is, you shall sit forever. "You pay the last farthing," that is, the smallest sins, according to Bede and Rabanus, because nothing will remain unpunished — for the farthing is a kind of coin having two mites. Or, according to Augustine and Jerome, by "farthing" he meant to signify earthly sins: for the last farthing is earth, which is the fourth part of the elements of this world, and the last from fire; as if he were to say: because you were unwilling to be fire through charity, air through the vigor of good work, water through the sanctification of Baptism, but were earthly by clinging to earthly things, you shall not go out from there, because you shall never fully pay off the sins which you contracted from the earth.

You have heard that it was said to the ancients: you shall not commit adultery, and so on. Above, he ordered the irascible appetite with respect to its passion; here he orders the concupiscible appetite with respect to the passion which is in its root, namely in the generative power. Now two things are set down here: first, the ordering of the concupiscible appetite as regards its motion; second, the confirmation of marriage itself, given as a remedy for it, at the place: whoever shall have put away his wife. Moreover in the first, he first warns against the disordered motion of concupiscence; second, he removes the occasion or provocation to it, at the place: but if thy right eye scandalize thee. The first contains two things, namely the justice of the old law, which consisted only in the external work; then the explanation of the new justice, which consists also in the internal, at the place: but I say to you, and so on. He says therefore, you have heard that it was said to the ancients, that is, to the Jews living under the precepts of the law a long time now elapsed. Hence Chrysostom: by saying to the ancients, he shows the great length of time since they received this commandment — you shall not commit adultery, that is, you shall not unlawfully mingle with a woman. For adultery properly is the illicit commingling of a man and a woman. Here Chrysostom asks why he does not speak of the first commandment. Response: because he begins from the most general passions, as was said above. But I say to you, that is, in addition to this commandment, which you think must be kept only in act, I add and explain that it must be kept also in the will, according to Augustine. For whoever shall have looked upon a woman, that is, whoever shall have fixed his gaze upon a woman. Now there is a question here, why, besides the other senses, he names only sight. Response: because sight is more ready at hand. Or, according to Bede, by sight he understands every movement of the mind toward delight. Likewise it is asked here, why he does not say, shall have desired, but whoever shall have looked. Response: because to desire is sometimes sudden and not deliberate, and thus it is venial, and is a propassion according to Jerome; but to look with a view to desiring involves deliberation, and therefore it is mortal, and is a passion according to Jerome. In connection with this it is asked, why he does not say to commit adultery, but only to desire her. Response: so as to give one to understand that not only the operation, or the consent to the operation, is damnable, but also the intention or the consent to the delighting. To desire her: according to Augustine and Jerome, that is, so as to look upon her with this end, that he may desire her inwardly, as he would do if the opportunity offered itself. He has already committed adultery with her in his heart, that is, he is guilty of adultery, because he has already passed over into the affection of the heart, according to Rabanus. Gregory: it is not lawful to gaze upon what it is not lawful to desire. Lamentations 3:51: my eye has preyed upon my soul. According to Augustine, under the name of those committing adultery he understands every carnal delight; and when he says shall have looked, sight is put for every movement that tends toward delight, not only bodily but also interior, which is in concupiscence, as Bede says.

But if thy eye, and so on. Here he removes the things that provoke to that very motion, which are principally two, namely sight and touch. He removes the first when he says, but if thy right eye scandalize thee; then the second, at the place, and if thy right hand scandalize thee. He says therefore, but if thy right eye scandalize thee; as if to say: above I forbade you adultery in act and in will, but I forbid even more, namely every occasion provoking to it; hence I say, but if thy right eye, and so on. This is expounded in many ways by the saints. According to Jerome, Bede, and Hilary: by eye he means sight and the affection of the mind; hence Jerome: because above he had spoken of desire for a woman, he now rightly calls thought also — turning the sense toward diverse things — the eye. And Hilary: by the eye, and the right eye, is understood the affection of any minds whatsoever. According to Augustine, Rabanus, and Chrysostom, the right eye can here be taken for friends and counselors, who as it were point out the way in matters to be done. Hence Chrysostom: he added right, that you may learn that the discourse is not about members, but about those who have dealt familiarly with us. Likewise, according to Augustine, Bede, and Jerome, the right eye can be taken for parents and relatives. Or, according to one Gloss, for the contemplative life. It is to be understood, then, thus: if thy eye, that is, sense and thought, right, that is, under the appearance of good intention, scandalize thee, by desiring unlawfully, pluck it out, that is, by breaking its evil use, and cast it from thee, that is, by annihilating it entirely. Hence Chrysostom: there was a religious woman, and I looked upon her, and said, I ought to visit her assiduously, that I may instruct her, and confirm her in good: this regard is good, and is the right eye. But while I visited assiduously, I fell into the snare of desire for her; behold, a good regard, and the right eye, became to me an occasion of scandal. I shall therefore cast away that good regard, which is about to generate evil. And he concludes below: therefore every good which scandalizes us, or others, we ought to cut off from ourselves. Likewise if the right eye, that is, a friend and counselor in divine matters, scandalize, by drawing into heresy, such a one is to be plucked out by reproving him, cast away by openly contradicting him. Likewise if parents scandalize, by hindering holiness of life, such an eye is to be plucked out by resisting, cast away by separating oneself from them. Likewise if the contemplative life scandalizes, by turning into tedium or arrogance, it is to be plucked out at times by diminishing it, cast away by passing over into the active life. For it is expedient for thee, that is, it is more necessary and useful for thee, that one of thy members perish, that is, such a sense, or counselor, or relative, or contemplation — hence the Gloss: that which you have as a member — than that thy whole body go into Gehenna, that is, than that thou be sent, wholly in soul and body, into hell. The Gloss: it is better to be saved with that cut off, than to be damned with it. On the contrary: according to the canons, whoever on such an occasion shall have cut off a member of himself is irregular. Moreover another Gloss of Chrysostom and Augustine: no member is commanded to be plucked out according to the letter. On the contrary: this is read to have been done in the Lives of the Fathers. Response to the first: that he does not intend that any member ought to be cut off for this reason; but he calls cutting off or plucking out the removing from oneself, through the effort of a devout labor, of the use or act of this kind, as was said above. To the second, which is objected from the Lives of the Fathers, the response is that this is excused by the Holy Spirit, by whose inspiration it is believed to have been done, as Augustine says of Samson in the book On the City of God; which is not otherwise excused, except because the Holy Spirit secretly commanded this, who through him worked miracles. And if thy right hand, that is, operation, or exterior touch with good intention; or a friend who ministers to thee in good things; or, according to Chrysostom, the right hand is the will of the soul, the left, the will of the body. This bodily hand, however, as the same author says, is the organ of that other hand. But it is asked, why he made no mention of the left eye and the left hand, since it happens that one can suffer scandal through that as well. Response: by removing the one which seemed to offer the lesser occasion, he removes also that which gives the greater occasion. Or, according to Chrysostom, that you may understand that he is not speaking of bodily members, but is speaking of familiars, or friends, as was said above. Scandalize thee, that is, be an occasion of thy ruin, or of scandal, cut it off, namely by dismissing it, or by fleeing it; hence Chrysostom: according to the letter, no member in man is commanded to be cut off, but through the effort of a devout labor, if it does harm, it is to be recalled, and removed, and even put far from oneself, so that it not even be held in memory. Hence he adds, and cast it from thee, that is, by abandoning it entirely. For it is expedient for thee that one of thy members perish, than that thy whole body go into Gehenna. The Gloss: that is, it is better for thee to be saved with that cut off, than to be damned with it.

It was said, and so on. Here is set down the second point, namely the confirmation of marriage given as a remedy for concupiscence. Hence, since above he removed the unlawful commingling against the law of marriage, here he removes the unlawful separation of those joined in marriage; and by this the confirmation of marriage stands against the heretics. Now two things are said here: first, the permission of the law of Moses; second, the justice and prohibition of the new law, at the place, but I say to you. He says therefore, it was said: he does not say by whom, or to whom, signifying by this that those to whom this was said were as it were estranged from God, Deuteronomy 24:1, where Moses wrote that if a wife should not please her husband on account of some uncleanness, he should put her away. Whoever shall have put away his wife, that is, shall have wished to put her away; and this was permitted by Moses, not commanded; hence Mark 10:4: Moses permitted a bill of divorce to be written, and the wife to be put away. Let him give her a bill of divorce. This was commanded under this condition, if he should put her away. And in the bill of divorce, as they say, the cause of the divorce was written, and the dowry which he was giving her, and the license which she had to marry another. Hence, according to Chrysostom, he renounced her, so that it would not be in his power to return to her. It is asked here, however, why Moses permitted this, since it was not enjoined upon him by the Lord. Response according to Ambrose and Chrysostom: he permitted it, lest, out of hatred or some other cause held against the wife, a greater evil should occur, namely her killing. Hence Ambrose: for it is better to be separated, than that blood be shed out of hatred. But it should be noted that permission is manifold. First, of licit concession, as when a superior grants you leave to visit your parents. Second, of dispensation, when he permits what is not lawful for you otherwise, such as to eat meat. Third, of toleration, as when between two evils the lesser is permitted, lest the greater occur: and such was the permission of Moses. For he is said to have permitted it, because he tolerated it, lest they should commit a greater evil, namely homicide, as was said above. And therefore the Lord says that Moses commanded this because of the hardness of their hearts, below, chapter 19:8. And such a permission is not a sin on the part of the one permitting, because he does this so as to resist a greater evil. Fourth, of indulgence, when something is permitted whose opposite is better: just as the apostles permitted second marriages, 1 Corinthians 7:39, although widowed continence would be better. Fifth, of sufferance, as God permits evils to be done, that he may draw forth good things. But I say to you, and so on, that is, determining this, that a wife is not to be put away for just any cause; and it was tolerated by Moses, lest a greater evil occur, namely homicide. Thus I restrict and explain: because whoever shall have put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, namely bodily fornication, of the man or of the woman, makes her commit adultery, because she marries another. And this is not marriage, but adultery; hence he adds, and whoever shall have married her that is put away, commits adultery, because she ought to remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband, as the Gloss says. But if he should put her away on account of the cause of fornication, as Augustine says, he himself does not make her commit adultery, but she does, whose is the guilt. Nor can the one putting her away, while she is living, marry another, as is touched on in 1 Corinthians 7:39. Note that whoever puts away, or repudiates his wife, does four evils, as Chrysostom says: because, as regards God, he exists a homicide; second, he puts away one who is not committing fornication; third, he makes her an adulteress; and fourth, he makes the one who receives her commit adultery. Likewise, the woman who commits adultery commits four sins: she disinherits her children, violates the faith, puts away her husband, and fornicates as a result of the adultery. On account of this it is said, Isaiah 50:1: where is the bill of divorce of your mother, with which I put her away? Ecclesiasticus 23:32: every woman who leaves her husband shall sin. Likewise note, on that phrase except for the cause of fornication, the Gloss of Augustine and Chrysostom: the cause of fornication is if the wife compels her husband to idolatry, or to avarice, or to other unlawful desires; for fornication is not only that of illicit intercourse, but generally whatever makes one stray from the law of God. Therefore spiritual fornication dissolves marriage. On the contrary, Jerome: if a woman sins against her own soul, she is not defiled as regards her husband: as if to say: because she sins only against her own soul, she has not sinned against her husband, and thus by this the marriage ought not to be dissolved. Response: the bond of marriage is considered in three ways: either as to mutual restraint, or as to the rendering of the carnal debt, or as to the cohabitation of mutual service. The first bond nothing dissolves except the death of one, or of both, because, the marriage having been consummated, the one cannot contract another marriage while the other lives. The second bond is dissolved in carnal fornication, yet with a distinction: for a certain spiritual fornication corrupts only the one committing it, such as pride, anger, and the like; another corrupts the one cohabiting with the sinner, such as heresy, or theft, and the like. As to the first way, therefore, the bond of cohabitation ought not to be dissolved. As to the second, it ought to be dissolved while that spiritual fornication persists, as if a wife should say she is unwilling to live with her husband unless he commits theft, or the like.

Now there are six cases, which are contained in these verses: similar, prostituting, force, death, and believed appearance if it be converted, afterward he knows, he cannot send away. In these cases it is not lawful to put away a wife committing fornication. The first is similarity, that is, if the husband himself is convicted of fornicating; the second, prostitution, that is, if the husband himself prostitutes her; the third is violence, that is, when she is overpowered by another through violence, and this is understood of absolute violence, and not of that which is through fear; the fourth is believed appearance, that is, when she is known by another under the appearance of her own husband, whom she supposed to be her husband; the fifth is death, that is, when she probably believes her husband to be dead, and marries another, and upon her husband's return she immediately withdraws from the latter union; the sixth is conversion, that is, when a believing spouse is put away by an unbelieving one according to the rite of the latter's own sect, afterward, both having been converted to the faith, the Church compels him to receive her back; the seventh is reconciliation, that is, when he has reconciled her to himself after adultery was committed, or has kept her though she commits adultery publicly. In these cases the husband cannot send away, that is, put away, a wife committing fornication. And thus is understood the Gloss of Augustine and Chrysostom. It is asked here, moreover, whether the same reasoning holds for husbands, if they are put away by their wives for the cause of fornication. Response of Jerome: whatever is said to husbands redounds also to wives, for neither is an adulterous wife to be put away, and an adulterous husband to be kept; the laws of Caesar are one thing, those of Christ another; among the former, the reins of chastity are loosened for husbands, but with Christ, what is not lawful for women is equally not lawful for men, because the same servitude is judged under an equal condition. Likewise, on that phrase makes her commit adultery, it is asked why he does not say, and if the woman marries another, she commits adultery. Response: the woman, as Chrysostom says, is weak; therefore, through the threats which she makes against the husband who puts her away, he wishes to correct that man's folly. Just as one who has a prodigal son, in putting him away, rebukes those who make him such, and forbids them to consort with him, or to appear before him.

Again you have heard that it was said to the ancients. Above, he ordered the irascible and the concupiscible appetites toward their passions; here he orders the rational power with respect to truth. Now truth is twofold, created and uncreated. He orders, therefore, the rational power toward uncreated truth through due reverence and honor; second, toward created truth through right interpretation, at the place, but let your speech be, yea yea, no no. In the first, two things are said. For first he sets down the justice of the law, which consists in two things, namely in the avoidance of perjury, and the fulfilling of an oath undertaken, at the place, but thou shalt render to the Lord thy oaths. Second, the justice of the Gospel, which consists in two things: in the prohibition of the frequent use of oaths, when he says, but I say to you, swear not at all; and in the explanation of the prohibition, when he says, neither by heaven, and so on. He says therefore, again you have heard that it was said to the ancients, thou shalt not forswear thyself, that is, thou shalt not commit perjury; hence Leviticus 19:12: thou shalt not swear falsely, lest thou pollute the name of thy God. Now Chrysostom asks why, passing over theft, he goes on to false witness. Response: because he who steals sometimes commits perjury, and not the converse, for he who is unwilling to lie, or to swear falsely, will never choose to steal, and by this he draws attention to it. Or it should be said that theft was punished in the law, but lying was not, and therefore, lest it be thought lawful, he here forbids it. But thou shalt render to the Lord thy oaths, Jerome: that is, if it should happen that you swear, you shall swear by the Creator, not by a creature. Hence he says to the Lord, not to an idol, or to a creature, because, as Chrysostom says, he who does not render his oaths to the Lord, but to the elements, sins in two ways: first, because he does not render to God his due; second, because he deifies that by which he swears, and thus commits idolatry. The Gloss of Jerome: just as he commanded victims to be sacrificed to God, lest they sacrifice them to idols, so to little ones it was granted to swear by God. Therefore if to little ones, this is not lawful for the perfect. On the contrary: the Apostle swore, Romans 1:9: God is my witness, and so on. And the angel, Apocalypse 10:6. Response: he calls little ones those who speak the truth, or the humble who fear God. Or, to little ones, that is, for the sake of little ones, that is, for the sake of these temporal things. But I say to you, that is, on the occasion of perjury I forbid oaths as well, commanding you not to swear at all, that is, for any cause whatsoever, or without a legitimate cause, because when one swears without cause, the attestation of the first truth is held in contempt, because it is assumed in vain, which is forbidden, Exodus 20:7: thou shalt not take the name of thy God in vain. On the contrary, Psalm 109:4: the Lord has sworn, and he will not repent; Hebrews 6:16: an oath for confirmation is an end of all controversy. Response: he forbids swearing at all, that is, continually. Or, at all, taken in the composite sense, that is, in every case. Now three things ought to be present in an oath: due matter, namely truth; due form, namely justice; and a right end: hence, according to Augustine, Gregory, and Origen, he did not forbid swearing altogether, but taught, on the occasion of perjury, what is more perfect. According to Alexander, this was commanded only to the apostles in the primitive Church, lest they be held imperfect. Or, when he says, swear not at all, the affection for swearing is forbidden, not the effect, as James 5:12: above all things, my brethren, swear not, that is, do not desire it. Hence Jerome: Christ forbids swearing altogether, lest anyone should desire an oath as though it were a good thing, and, by the constant practice of swearing, slip into perjury. Likewise Augustine, in the book On Lying, says: swear not at all, that is, as far as it is in you, do not love it, nor desire it with any delight. Likewise the same Augustine: swearing is not good, yet it is not evil, when it is necessary. On the contrary, Augustine in the sermon On the Danger of Swearing: false swearing is pernicious, true swearing is dangerous, no swearing is safe. If it is dangerous, therefore it is evil. Response: it is called dangerous with respect to the one swearing, not because it is evil, but because some condition of the oath can easily be omitted, which is threefold, according to that word of Jeremiah 4:2: thou shalt swear, as the Lord lives, in truth, in judgment, and in justice. He swears in truth who swears according to the truth of the matter and of conscience; in justice, who swears lawfully; in judgment, who swears for a sufficient cause. Neither by heaven. Chrysostom: he who swears by heaven deifies heaven, and by heaven he understands every higher natural creature. The Gloss: let us not swear by creatures. On the contrary: Joseph swore by the health of Pharaoh, Genesis 42:15. Response: he swore, knowing that his power and health were from God. Therefore it was not to swear by a creature, but by God, in whose hand is the health of all. For it is the throne of God; Isaiah, last chapter, 1: heaven is my seat. Nor by the earth, by which is understood every lower natural creature, for it is the footstool of his feet; Isaiah, ibid.: the earth is the footstool of my feet. And, as Augustine says, God is said to sit in heaven, and to tread the earth, not because he has his members so situated, but because in the body of the world the greatest appearance is that of heaven, the least that of earth; on account of which he is said to sit in heaven, because he shines forth in his great power. Then he comprehends artificial creation, saying, neither by Jerusalem. It was the custom of the Jews to swear by Jerusalem, and the temple, and things of this kind. Because it is the city of the great king; Psalm 76:14: what god is great like our God? Neither shalt thou swear by thy head. By this is understood every creature which is the same as ourselves. Augustine: when someone swears by my health, he pledges his own health to God. When by my sons, he pledges them to God, so that this may fall upon their head which proceeds from his mouth. Because thou canst not make one hair white or black, namely, naturally; as if to say, this is not your work, but God's. Hence Augustine: to swear by any creatures whatsoever is to call upon their Creator as witness. On account of all these things it is said, Ecclesiasticus 23:9: let not thy mouth be accustomed to swearing. Chrysostom: there is no one who swears frequently who does not sometimes commit perjury.

But let your speech be, yea yea, no no. This is the second part, where he orders the rational power toward created truth through right interpretation, namely when truth is expressed in word, according as it is conceived in the mind. Hence he says, thus I forbade swearing even when it is necessary to speak. But let it be, that is: but, let your speech be, yea yea, that is, let your speech, having the reality of the thing, be, yea yea, that is, let it be uttered according to the truth of conscience; no no, that is, of a thing which is not, let it be uttered that it is not. Hence Rabanus: yea yea, no no — he says it twice, so that what you say with your mouth, you may confirm by your works; what you deny in words, you may not confirm by deeds. But that which is more than these is of evil, that is, that which is asserted, or denied, beyond the simple truth of the matter, as through an oath, is of evil: he does not say that it is evil, as Augustine says, but of evil, namely not of you, but from the weakness of the one compelling you to swear, or from unbelief. Hence note that it is lawful to swear for many causes. First, for confirming the truth to unbelievers, 2 Corinthians 1:18: God is faithful, for our word toward you was not yea and nay. Second, for restoring peace, as Jacob swore to Laban, Genesis 31:53. Third, for contracting friendship, Genesis 26:28: the men of Gerar said to Isaac: let there be an oath between us. Fourth, for manifesting the truth, Deuteronomy 19:15: in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word stand. Fifth, for keeping fidelity, 2 Kings 5:3: the elders of Israel came to the king, and he made a covenant with them. Sixth, for the acknowledgment of obedience and subjection: thus the men of Gilead swore to Jephthah. Seventh, for keeping the custom of the Church, as canons do: just as the sons of Israel swore that they would serve the Lord. And these seven causes are for the sake of introducing some good. Likewise there are two other causes for the sake of removing some evil, namely as one swears in the contesting of a lawsuit, that calumny may be put to rest; Hebrews 6:16: an oath for confirmation is an end of all controversy. The other cause is for purging infamy; Deuteronomy 21:1: when the body of a man slain shall be found, and it is not known who is guilty of the murder, the elders and the judges shall go out... and shall say: our hands did not shed this blood, nor did our eyes see it. Be merciful to thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, O Lord.

You have heard that it was said, an eye for an eye. This is the second part from that place, "but I say to you," etc., in which he exhorts to the perfection of fulfillment, by adding counsels. And first he sets down counsels with respect to judicial matters; second with respect to moral matters, at the place "you have heard that it was said, you shall love your neighbor." The first is divided into two. First he sets down the justice of the old law; second the perfection of the new law, which consists in two things, namely in the endurance of an inflicted evil, and in the performance of beneficence, at the place "but he who asks of you, give to him." Now in enduring an inflicted evil, there is a twofold way: either in the body, or in a possession, at the place "if anyone wishes to contend with you at law"; or in labor, at the place "if anyone forces you to go a thousand paces." As to patience under an evil inflicted on the body, he exhorts according to a twofold degree. In one way, not to seek revenge; in another way, to be prepared to endure more, at the place "if anyone strikes you on your right cheek."

He says therefore "you have heard that it was said" — he does not say to whom, so as to hint that they were hard of heart — "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," in which the law of retaliation was established for an inflicted injury, as Augustine says, Exodus 21:24 and Deuteronomy 19:21. But it is asked why Moses granted the law of retaliation. Response: Moses saw that they were reckless in inflicting injuries and in taking revenge; and therefore, since he could not restrain them otherwise, he wished to temper the penalty of revenge, so that they would not avenge injuries inflicted beyond measure, but would render an equal retaliation, like for like, for an equal wrong.

Likewise, on that passage, the Gloss of Augustine: the law established a measure of vengeance. Against this, Leviticus 19:18: "you shall not seek revenge, nor shall you be mindful of the injury of your fellow citizens." Response: the law of retaliation was a precept given to the judge, and this so that he might act out of zeal for justice, and not out of zeal for revenge, for the restraint of evildoers; and thus Augustine understands it. But because it was permitted to the injured party according to equality, the Jews thought that they themselves could take revenge; and therefore it is forbidden in Leviticus. Likewise, in the same place, Augustine: "it is the justice of the unjust" — not because the vengeance which the law established is unjust. Therefore vengeance was lawful. Response: vengeance out of love of justice was lawful for the judge himself, not out of love of revenge. Hence the Gloss is to be understood thus: "just vengeance of the unjust," that is, of those unjustly demanding revenge.

"But I" — as if he were to say: to them it was thus granted, but I say to you, that is, in speaking I admonish you not to resist evil, that is, that you should not wish to repel an inflicted injury by avenging it, or with the intention of avenging it. Hence when he says "evil," he means the temporal evil, or the evil of punishment, as Augustine and Jerome say; and not the evil of fault, to which one must resist even unto death. Chrysostom: he commanded this, not that we should mutually gouge out one another's eyes, but rather that we should keep ourselves innocent, or restrain our hands, and thus by such a threat he curbed the onslaught of injury. Likewise the same: anger is not quelled by anger. And it must be understood of the evil of punishment, which is threefold, as Augustine says: in the torment of bodies, the loss of possessions, and the forced labor of works.

But it is asked whether "not to resist evil" is a precept, or a counsel. Response: the injury which he here calls "evil" is either particular and private, or public. If public, then it must be repelled by order of the prince; Romans 13:4: "he is the minister of God, an avenger to execute wrath upon him who does evil." Likewise Augustine: the fortitude which defends the fatherland from barbarians, or defends the weak at home, or defends companions from robbers, is full justice. And thus it is a precept for subjects, not only for princes. Or the injury can be particular; and then the injury can be repelled in three ways: either by impeding it, as Paul did, who through soldiers impeded the injuries of the Jews; or by rebuking, as the Lord did to the one who gave him a blow, John 22:23, and in this way it is lawful for all, both the perfect and the imperfect; or it is repelled under the compulsion of necessity, as when injury cannot be avoided, neither by flight, nor by any other means; and then it is repelled either without arms, and in this way it is permitted to clerics and laymen; or with arms, and thus it is not lawful for clerics, although perhaps it may be lawful for laymen, the crime being in the act, with the moderation of blameless defense, as the law says — and thus it is a precept for clerics, but for laymen a counsel; or it is repelled with the intention of avenging, or with the desire of revenge, and thus it is forbidden to all, and is a precept. And thus understood in manifold ways, "not to resist evil" is a matter of precept, or of counsel.

"If anyone strikes you on the right cheek" — literally — "offer him the other also," that is, be prepared to endure it patiently. Rabanus: not only should you not strike back, but if he wishes to strike the other, you should bear it patiently. And this was fitting for the apostles for that time: for since they were about to found the Church, he willed that they should endure the first onslaughts of persecutors, so that men, seeing their patience, might be converted to the faith. Hence Chrysostom: if you carefully consider what sort of hearers of the law they were, and in what manner of life they were living, and when they received these precepts, you will easily understand, and will greatly marvel at the wisdom of the lawgiver.

Or, "offer him the other also." The Gloss: the whole body for affliction. Jerome: "the other," that is, the right, because the just man is wholly right. Ambrose: what is so wondrous as to offer one's cheek to the one who strikes? Is not every onslaught of the indignant broken, is not anger calmed, and is not the one who inflicts the injury, through patience, called back to repentance?

And "to him who wishes" — the Gloss, of altercation — "to contend with you at law," that is, to act contentiously, "and to take away your tunic," that is, the cheaper garments, "leave to him your cloak also," that is, the more precious garments, or the outer ones, before you act contentiously and fraudulently. And according to this it is forbidden to all to bring a lawsuit against anyone with fraud and contentiousness. Hence concerning this judgment Chrysostom says: every lawsuit is an irritation of the heart; if you have once entered into litigation, you no longer think of how the truth of the case may appear, but of how you may by any means come out the victor. Or it can be an admonition with respect to the perfect, because although it is lawful for the weak to bring a case against a neighbor before a judge, provided it be without fraud, nevertheless it is not lawful for the perfect to have a lawsuit with a neighbor. Hence Chrysostom: he who ought to have venerated you on account of the dignity of a son, judges you on account of the necessity of the case, and you lose the dignity of Christ on account of worldly business. Hence these verses are wont to be said: it is expedient for the weak — provided it be without deceit — to be without a lawsuit; and it is permitted to prelates; it is not expedient for the anchorite; it is not lawful that through him matters be sought at law.

Now there is a threefold cause for which things taken away can be reclaimed by some in place of the perfect. The first is the restraining of evildoers; Job 29:17: "I broke the jaws of the wicked, and out of his teeth I took away the prey." Gregory: care must be taken not only that they not take away what is ours, but that, in seizing what is not theirs, they not destroy themselves. The second is the preservation of peace; Isaiah 32:17: "the work of justice shall be peace." The third is the consolation of the poor, to whom those temporal goods were given for their sustenance.

"And whoever" — behold the third, namely the admonition concerning the forced labor of works: for "angaria" is the exacting of undue service, or of labor, in one's own person; hence he says, "and whoever forces you to go a mile," that is, compels you bodily to serve, for example, that you go with him a thousand paces, "go with him two more," that is, be prepared still further, to endure more. Augustine: taken historically, we do not find this fulfilled either in Jesus, or in his followers. It is explained, therefore: "go," according to Augustine, not so much with the feet, as with a prepared affection and mind; as if he were to say: if anyone compels you to serve, and to bestow comfort, be prepared, out of an affection of compassion, to bestow much more.

"And to him who asks of you, give." Here is set down the perfection in the showing of beneficence, which takes place in two ways: namely, without hope of reward, by giving to the needy; and by granting a loan without interest to those who ask. As to the first he says, "he who asks of you, give to him" — a thing, or a correction. The Gloss: those things which can be given honorably and justly. He says "honorably," because a thing might be so necessary that it could not honorably be given. "Justly," because another's property cannot justly be given. Augustine: give in such a way that you harm neither yourself, nor another.

Now there is a threefold gift which we ought especially to give: namely, from the heart, compassion; Isaiah 58:10: "when you shall pour out your soul to the hungry," etc. Gregory: it is more to have compassion from the heart than to give, because he who has compassion gives of himself; he who gives of money, gives of what is external. Secondly, from the mouth, the consolation of a sweet word; Ecclesiasticus 18:16: "shall not the dew refresh the heat? So is a word better than a gift." Thirdly, from the hand, temporal substance; Deuteronomy 15:11: "I command that you open your hand to your needy brother."

But it is asked here, whether all are bound to this, and always. Response: a gift can be temporal, or spiritual. If temporal, it is either a matter of service in a work; and thus everyone is bound toward the needy; Exodus 23:5: "if you see the donkey of him that hates you lying under its burden, you shall not pass by, but shall lift it up with him"; or it is a matter of goods, and then it is either of superfluous goods, or of necessary ones. Clerics are bound as to the superfluous; hence Ambrose: it is not a greater crime to take from one who has, than, when you are able, to deny to the needy. But as to necessary or superfluous goods in a case of need, everyone is bound, namely when someone is placed in extreme necessity. Hence Jerome, on that passage of Romans 12:20, "if your enemy is hungry": whoever is able to come to the aid of one dying in whatever necessity, if he does not do so, kills him. But if he is not rich, since he cannot give temporal things, he is bound to affection. Hence the Gloss: if the means are lacking, give affection. But if it is spiritual, then it is either of compassion from the heart, or of a sweet word from the mouth, or of wisdom from the mind, and it obligates both the poor and the rich; hence Jerome: in the case of many poor this cannot always hold, but even the rich, if they always divide what they have, will not always be able to give. The precept, therefore, is understood, according to Jerome, of that wealth which does not fail by being given, that is, of wisdom; but the more it is given, the more it is multiplied.

"And from him who would borrow of you, turn not away." Behold the second kind of lending, according to Chrysostom, namely when we lend to one who will repay; hence he says, "and to him who would borrow from you" — that is, to one wishing to receive a loan from you — "do not turn away." The Gloss: that is, do not alienate your good will. Chrysostom: the money of the usurer is like the bite of the asp: for one bitten by the asp, as though delighted, goes into sleep, and dies through the sweetness of the slumber, because then the poison runs secretly through all his members; so he who receives money under usury, for a time feels it as though it were a benefit; but the usury runs through all his resources, and turns the whole into debt.

"You have heard that it was said: you shall love your neighbor," etc. Here he sets down counsels with respect to moral matters. And because moral matters are fulfilled in the love of neighbor, Romans 13:8: "he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law"; therefore he exhorts to the love of anyone who is your neighbor and conformed to you in nature, as even enemies are. Now three things are said here. First, the disapproval of the old law; second, the tradition made by the Jews, at the place "and you shall hate your enemy"; third, the perfection of the gospel law, at the place "but I say to you: love your enemies." In which he touches on four things: namely, the love of enemies; second, the reason for his admonition, at the place "that you may be children of your Father"; third, the confirmation of his reasoning, at the place "for if you love those who love you, what reward shall you have?"; fourth, the conclusion of perfection, at the place "be you therefore perfect."

He says therefore, "you have heard that it was said: you shall love your neighbor," namely in affection and in effect, "and you shall hate your enemy." This is never found in the law, but is an addition on the part of the Jews: for they thought this ought perhaps to be added from the many things that are said in the law; for God commanded that they should destroy the Amalekites, and in Exodus 23:22 it is said: "I will be an enemy to your enemies." And so with other passages. And therefore against this the perfection of the gospel is set down, which consists in three things: in the act of the heart, of work, and of the mouth.

As to the act of the heart he says, "but I say to you: love your enemies" — literally, by counseling, by helping, by bestowing benefits. Augustine, in On True Religion: what will harm him who is able to make good use even of an enemy? For he does not fear enmities by the protection and merit of him by whose precept and gift he loves his enemies. But it is asked whether all are bound to this. Response: all are bound to this in affection, and also in effect in a case of necessity, as was said above. But the perfect, outside of necessity, ought to love their enemies perfectly, in affection and in effect. In affection, however, they can love the enemies of the Church universal.

"Do good" — in the effect of work — "to those who hate you," both from conformity of nature, Isaiah 58:7: "you shall not despise your own flesh," and from the charity of God and neighbor; Romans 12:20: "if your enemy is hungry, feed him," etc. Chrysostom: if you have done good to an enemy, you have done more good to yourself. And "pray" — with the word of the mouth — "for those who persecute you," through open injury, "and for those who slander you," through apparent injustice. Or, "those who persecute," in deed; "those who slander," that is, those who falsely accuse in word. Stephen did this, Acts 7:59. And Christ, Luke 23:34: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

"That you may be children of your Father." Here is set down the reason for the admonition from a twofold example, namely the divine and the human. As to the divine example he says, you ought to love in such a way that you may be children of your Father, that is, by imitation. Hence Rabanus: children not degenerate. Carnal children, if they are similar to their fathers, merit no praise; if dissimilar, no blame — because it is not in a man's power what quality of body he receives. But spiritual children, if similar, are to be praised; if dissimilar, to be blamed — because it is in the power of each one to bring about the measure of justice. "Who is in heaven," through the greater shining-forth of his work. Or "in heaven," according to the Gloss, that is, in the elect and the saints through grace.

"Who [makes] his sun." Behold the human example. And he says pointedly "his," that is, which he himself made, against the heretics. "He makes it rise upon the good and the bad" — literally, according to Rabanus; "and rains upon the just and the unjust" — likewise literally. Or by the sun can be signified the influence of divine goodness; by the rain, the manifestation of truth; as if he were to say: if you are like the heavenly Father, you will do good to the good and to the bad.

"For if you love those who love you," etc. Here he proves his reasoning and admonition by the example of the publicans; as if he were to say: it is not perfection merely to love friends; for if you love those who love you, what reward shall you have? As if to say, none. Below, 6:2: "you have received your reward." "Do not even the publicans do this?" What kind of perfection will there be in you, if in love you do not surpass the example of the publicans, who are imperfect? According to Rabanus, those are called publicans who pursue public taxes, or secular business, or gains. And, as the same author says, the publican took his name from king Publius, who first instituted them.

"And if you greet your brethren only," that is, if you pray only for those who are joined to you by some kinship, or friendship — for greeting, as the Gloss says, is a certain species of prayer — "what do you do more?" That is, what more will you do than the nations, or the Gentiles, who do this out of a certain human affection? As if to say: in this you will not be more perfect than the Gentiles. "For even the heathen" — Rabanus: that is, the Gentiles, or those given over to the Gentiles: "ethnos" in Greek, "gens" in Latin — "do this," that is, out of human affection they have compassion on their own, and pray for their own. Chrysostom: if it is unworthy that one who is of the same rank as you should despise you, how much more unworthy is it that God be despised by you?

"Be therefore." Here the conclusion is set down; as if to say: I have admonished you to gospel perfection, therefore be perfect; the Gloss: in the charity of God and neighbor, "as also your heavenly Father is perfect." The Gloss: "as" denotes imitation, not equality; as if to say: do what I have said, so that you may merit to be children of the heavenly Father through the grace of adoption.

And note that perfection is twofold: namely, of glory, and of the way. Concerning the first, Ephesians 4:13: "until we all attain to a perfect man," etc. The perfection of the way is either of nature, concerning which Genesis 2:1: "the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the furnishing of them"; or it is of grace: and this is twofold, either of state, or of merit.

The perfection of merit is manifold. The first is of the heart; Isaiah 38:3: "remember how I have walked before you in truth and with a perfect heart." The second is of the mouth; James 3:2: "if any man does not offend in word, he is a perfect man." The third is of work, and this is manifold. The first is of innocence; Ecclesiasticus 31:8: "blessed is the man who is found without blemish," etc. And it follows: "who has been tried thereby, and found perfect." The second is of excellence of life, Genesis 6:9: "Noah was a just and perfect man in his generations": to this clerics are bound above laymen. The third is of obedience; Genesis 17:1: "walk before me, and be perfect." The fourth is of patience; James 1:4: "patience has a perfect work." The fifth is of perseverance; 1 Peter 1:13: "sober, and perfect." The Gloss: by constantly persevering. The sixth is of charity; 1 John 4:18: "perfect charity casts out fear": to this all are bound.

The perfection of state is twofold. The first is of order; Deuteronomy 33:8, it is said to the Levites: "your perfection and your doctrine be to your holy man." The second is of prelacy; Luke 6:40: "every one shall be perfect, if he be as his master." The third is of religious life; below, chapter 19:21: "if you will be perfect, go, and sell all that you have, and give to the poor," etc.