Commentary on the Gospel of John

After the Lord treated of spiritual life and nourishment, here he consequently treats of instruction or teaching, which is necessary for those spiritually regenerated, as was said above; and first he shows the origin of his teaching; second, he makes manifest its usefulness, from the eighth chapter onward. Concerning the first he does three things. First, the place is set down where he made manifest the origin of his teaching; second, the occasions of manifesting it are set down, at the place "The Jews therefore sought him," etc.; third, the manifestation itself is set down, at the place "Jesus answered them, and said: My doctrine is not mine," and so forth. Concerning the first he does three things. First, the incitement of Christ to go to the place is set down, where he published the origin of his teaching; second, the Lord's refusal is set down, at the place "Jesus therefore says to them," etc.; third, it is added how Christ arrived at that place, at the place "When he had said these things, he himself remained in Galilee." Concerning the first he does two things. First, he sets down the occasions why they incited Christ to go; second, he adds the incitement itself, at the place "His brothers therefore said to him."

Now they were moved by three things to incite Christ to go into Judea: first indeed from his delay; second from his purpose; third from the fitness of the time. From his delay indeed in Galilee, in which Christ showed that he wished to remain: and therefore he says after these things — namely, the words which were spoken in Capernaum — Jesus walked in Galilee; that is, he had taken the journey from Capernaum, which was the metropolis of Galilee, so as to travel about through Galilee. The Lord dwells more frequently in Galilee for this reason, that he might show us that we must pass over from vices to virtues; Ezekiel 12:3: "Therefore, son of man, make thee vessels of removing, and thou shalt remove by day in their sight."

From the purpose of Christ, moreover, which perhaps had become known to them through his words; and therefore he says: for he was not willing to walk in Judea. The reason for this is that the Jews sought to kill him; above, John 5:18: "The Jews sought to kill him: because he not only broke the sabbath, but also said that God was his Father, making himself equal to God." But could he not have gone there, and walked among the Jews, and not been killed by them, just as he did below, John 8:59? I answer that a threefold reason is assigned for this.

The first is from Augustine: because it was going to happen that some faithful follower of Christ would hide himself lest he be found by persecutors. Therefore, lest flight be cast up against that one as a crime, the Lord willed, for our consolation, to show that this had gone before in himself: which he also taught by word. Matthew 10:23: "If they shall persecute you in one city, flee into another." Another reason indeed is that Christ was both God and man, and therefore by the power of his divinity he was able not to be harmed by his persecutors. But he did not wish to do this continually, because in that case his divinity would have been declared, yet his humanity would have come into doubt. And therefore, at one time fleeing persecutors as a man, he asserts his humanity, so as to confound all who say that he was not a true man. At another time, passing through them unharmed, he shows his divinity, confounding all who say that he was a mere man. And therefore Chrysostom has another reading, namely: "for he did not have the power, even if he wished, to walk into Judea": which is said according to the human manner; just as if it were said: someone cannot go somewhere, even if he wished, on account of ambushes. The third reason is that the time of the Passion was not yet at hand: for it was going to happen that he would suffer at the Passover, when the lamb was immolated, so that thus one victim might succeed another victim; below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour was come, that he should pass out of this world to the Father."

From the fitness of the time, indeed, because it was a fitting time to go into Jerusalem: and this is what he says: "Now the Jews' feast of Tabernacles was near." Now "Scenopegia" is a Greek word, composed from "scenos," which is shade, and "phagim," which is to eat; as if to say: it was the time in which they ate in tabernacles. For the Lord commanded the children of Israel, Leviticus 23:41, that in the seventh month, for seven days, they should dwell in tabernacles, in memory of the fact that for forty years they dwelt in tabernacles in the desert. And this feast the Jews were then celebrating. The Evangelist recalls this, in order to show that he passed over a great deal of time from the time when the foregoing things about spiritual food were said, up to this time. For when he worked the miracle of the loaves, it was near the day of the Passover; but this feast of Tabernacles is much after the Passover; and thus the Evangelist here recounts nothing of the things which were done by the Lord in the five intervening months: so that it may be understood that, although he unfailingly worked signs, as is clear below at the end, the Evangelists took special care to relate those things for which either complaint or contradiction from the Jews followed.

Consequently, when he says "His brothers therefore said to him," the incitement of the Lord's brothers is set down; and first their admonition is set down; second the reason for the admonition is assigned, at the place "that thy disciples also may see thy works"; third, the cause of such a reason is assigned by the Evangelist, at the place "for neither did his brothers believe in him." Concerning the first, first those who incite him are set down; hence he says "His brothers therefore said to him" — not brothers by flesh and womb, as Helvidius blasphemed, which the Catholic faith abhors: that that most holy virginal womb, which brought forth God and man, should afterward have brought forth another mortal man. Therefore they were his brothers by kinship, because they were blood relations of the Blessed Virgin Mary; for this is the custom of Scripture, to call blood relations brothers, according to that saying of Genesis 13:8: "Let there be no quarrel, I beseech thee, between me and thee... for we are brothers"; although Lot was in fact the nephew of Abraham. And, as Augustine says, just as in the tomb where the Lord's body had been laid, no body lay either before or after, so the womb of Mary, neither before nor after, conceived anything mortal. But because some of the blood relations of the Blessed Virgin were apostles, such as the sons of Zebedee, and James the son of Alphaeus, and others, it is therefore not to be understood that these were among those who incited Christ; rather, those were other relatives of his, who did not love Christ.

Second, their admonition is set down, when they say "Pass from hence" — namely from Galilee — "and go into Judea," where Jerusalem is, a solemn place, fitting for teachers; Amos 7:12: "Thou seer, go into the land of Judah: and there thou shalt eat thy bread, and there thou shalt prophesy." Then they add the reason, saying, "that thy disciples also may see thy works," where they show themselves, first, desirous of vainglory; second, suspicious; and third, unbelieving.

They show themselves desirous of vainglory indeed, when they say "that thy disciples also may see thy works." For they were affected by something human toward Christ, and wished to catch at glory from the human honor that would be shown to Christ by the crowds; and therefore they were urging him to do his works in public. For it is proper to one desirous of vainglory that whatever is glorious in himself or in his own be shown in public; Matthew 6:5: "they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men"; of whom it is said below, John 12:43: "they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God."

But they show themselves suspicious, and first they charge Christ with fearfulness; hence they say to him, "for no man doth anything in secret," as if they were saying: you say that you work miracles, but you do them in secret, and this out of fear — otherwise you would go into Jerusalem and do them there before the multitude. Yet the Lord says below, John 18:20: "in secret I have spoken nothing." Second, they charge him with love of glory; hence they say, "and he himself seeketh to be known openly," as if they were saying: you seek glory from the things you do, and yet out of fear you hide yourself. This is proper to evil men, that they believe others have passions of soul similar to their own. See how irreverently the prudence of the flesh was accusing the Word made flesh: against whom Job 4:3 says: "Thou reprovest him who is not like thee, and speakest what is not expedient for thee."

They show themselves to be unbelieving, when they say, "If thou do these things, manifest thyself to the world"; as though they put in doubt whether he actually worked miracles; Isaiah 21:2: "he who is unbelieving acts unfaithfully." But the cause why they spoke in this way, the Evangelist adds, when he says, "for neither did his brothers believe in him." For it happens that carnal blood-relations are especially opposed to their own, and envy them their spiritual goods, and hold them in contempt. Hence Augustine says: they were able to have Christ as a blood-relation, but in that very kinship they disdained to believe in him. Micah 7:6: "a man's enemies are they of his own household"; Job 19:13: "He hath put my brethren far from me, and my acquaintance like strangers have departed from me: my kinsmen have forsaken me, and they that knew me have forgotten me."

Consequently, when he says "Jesus therefore said to them: My time is not yet come," etc., the response of Christ is set down: and first he designates the unfitness of the time for going up; second he assigns the reason for what was said, at the place "the world cannot hate you"; third he sets down his refusal to go up, at the place "Go you up to this festival day," and so forth. Now it must be known that the whole following text is expounded in one way according to Augustine, and in another way according to Chrysostom.

For, according to Augustine, the Lord's brothers were inviting him to human glory. Now there is a time in which the saints arrive at glory, namely the future time, which they reach through sufferings and tribulations. Wisdom 3:6: "As gold in the furnace he hath proved them, and as a victim of a holocaust he hath received them, and in time there shall be respect had to them." But there is another time in which worldly men acquire their glory, namely the present time. Wisdom 2:7-8: "let not the flower of the time pass by us: let us crown ourselves with roses before they be withered: let no meadow escape our riot," etc. The Lord therefore wished to show that he was not seeking the glory of this present time; but wished to arrive at the height of heavenly glory through his passion and his humility. Luke 24:26: "It behooved Christ to suffer, and so to enter into his glory." And therefore he says to them, namely to his brothers, "my time," that is, the time of my glory, "is not yet come": because it is necessary that sorrow be turned into joy. Romans 8:18: "the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, that shall be revealed in us." But "your time," that is, the glory of the world, "is always ready."

He assigns the reason for this diversity of time when he says, "the world cannot hate you; but me it hateth." For worldly men have the time of glory ready, because they love the same things that the world loves, and they consent with the world. But the saints, who seek spiritual glory, do not have this time ready, because they seek the things that displease the world, namely poverty, mourning, hunger, and the like. They also censure what the world loves; indeed, they hold the world itself in contempt; Galatians 6:14: "the world is crucified to me, and I to the world." And therefore he says, "the world cannot hate you"; as if he were saying: the time of your glory is ready for this reason, that the world does not hate you, who agree with it, and every animal loves its like. "But me it hateth"; and therefore my time is not always ready. And the reason for the hatred is, "because I give testimony of it" — namely, of the world — "that the works thereof are evil"; that is, I do not neglect to reprove worldly men, although I know that from this I incur hatred and that death is threatened. Amos 5:10: "They have hated him that rebuketh in the gate" — namely, those who love wickedness. And Proverbs 9:8: "Rebuke not a scorner."

But are not some worldly men held in hatred by the world, that is, by another worldly man? The response must be given that, in a particular case, one worldly man indeed is held in hatred by another, insofar as he has those things which the other would wish to have, or impedes him in the things that pertain to the glory of the world; but insofar as he is worldly, no one is hated by the world. But the saints are universally hated by the world, because they are contrary to it; and if anyone belonging to the world loves them, this is not insofar as he belongs to the world, but insofar as there is something spiritual in him.

The Lord, moreover, refuses to go up, when he says, "Go you up to this festival day; but I go not up." For just as there are two glories, so there are two different feasts. For worldly men have temporal feasts, namely to rejoice and to feast, and other such outward delights. Isaiah 22:12-13: "the Lord called to weeping, and to mourning, to baldness, and to girding with sackcloth: and behold joy and gladness, to kill calves, and slay rams, to eat flesh, and drink wine"; and again, Isaiah 1:14: "my soul hateth your solemnities." But the saints have spiritual feasts, which consist in the delights of the spirit. Isaiah 33:20: "Look upon Sion, the city of thy solemnity." And therefore he says: "you," who seek the glory of the world, "go up to this festival day," that is, to the feasts of temporal gladness; "but I will not go up" to this festival day, but to the festival day of eternal solemnity; and this, because my time — namely, of true glory, which will be a permanent joy without end forever, an eternity without labor, a brightness without cloud — "is not yet fulfilled."

According to Chrysostom, the same division being kept, it is expounded thus: namely, that the Lord's brothers had conspired with the Jews for Christ's death, and hence were urging him to go, wishing to betray him and hand him over to the Jews. And therefore he says, "my time" — namely, of the cross and of death — "is not yet come," for me to go into Judea and be killed; "but your time is always ready," because you will be able to associate with them without danger. And the reason for this is, that they cannot hate you, who are zealous for the same things and love the same things as they do; "but me it hateth: because I give testimony of it, that the works thereof are evil." By which it is clear that the Jews hate me, not on account of the breaking of the sabbath, but on account of public reproof. "You therefore go up to this festival day," namely to the beginning of the feast (for it was celebrated for seven days, as was said); "but I will not go up" to this festival day, namely with you, that is, to the beginning of the feast, because "my time is not yet fulfilled," in which I am to suffer: for he was to be crucified at the Passover to come. The reason, then, he did not go up with them was so that he might more easily remain hidden, and so forth.

After the Evangelist has dealt with the urging by which Christ's kinsmen were inducing him to go up into Judea, and has set down Christ's reply, here he consequently deals with his going up; and first the delay of Christ's going up is set down; second, its order; third, the manner of the ascent. The delay indeed is set down when he says "when he had said these things," namely the things he had answered, "he himself remained in Galilee," not going up with his kinsmen for the feast day, so that his word might be verified, which he had said: "I will not go up to this feast day." Numbers 23:19: "God is not as man, that he should lie, nor as the son of man, that he should be changed." But its order is set down when he says "but when his brethren," that is his kinsmen, "had gone up, then he himself also went up," etc. But this seems to be against what he had said above: "but I will not go up"; since the Apostle says, 2 Corinthians 1:19: "Christ Jesus, who was preached among you by us... was not in him 'yes' and 'no,' but 'yes' was in him."

I answer, saying first, that the feast of Tabernacles (Scenopegia) was celebrated for seven days, as has been said. But the Lord had said above: "but I will not go up to this feast," that is, to the beginning of the feast. But what is said here, "to the feast day," must be understood as to the intervening days, whence there follows: "but now, the feast day being in the midst." And thus it is clear that Christ's deed is not contrary to his word.

Second, as Augustine says, these men wanted Christ to go up into Judea in order to seek temporal glory, and so he said to them: "I will not go up to this feast," in the manner in which you wish. But he himself went up to the feast, as one about to teach the crowds and instruct them concerning everlasting glory.

Third, according to Chrysostom, because he had said above "I will not go up to this feast day," to suffer and die, as they themselves wished; and yet he himself went up to the feast, not in order to suffer, but in order to instruct others.

The manner of the ascent is shown to be not in the open, but as it were in secret. And of this there is a threefold reason. One, according to Chrysostom, lest, by laying bare his divinity too much, his incarnation should be less certain, as has been said above, and so as to take away the shame of hiding, for just men, when they cannot publicly restrain their persecutors; and therefore he says "as it were in secret," to show that this was done by dispensation. Isaiah 45:15: "Truly you are a hidden God."

Another reason, according to Augustine, namely so that it might be understood that Christ is hidden in the figures of the Old Testament. Isaiah 8:17: "I have waited for the Lord, who hides his face," that is, his manifest knowledge, "from the house of Jacob"; whence also "even to this present day a veil is placed over their heart," as is said in 2 Corinthians 3:15. Therefore all the things that were said to that ancient people were shadows of the good things to come, as is said in Hebrews 10:1. Therefore, so as to show that even the feast itself was a figure, he therefore went up in secret. Scenopegia, as has been said, was the feast of tents. He therefore celebrates this feast who understands himself to be a pilgrim in this world.

Another reason is, so as to teach us that we ought to hide the good things we do, not seeking the favor of men, nor desiring the pomps of attending crowds, according to that saying, Matthew 6:1: "Take heed that you do not do your righteousness before men, in order to be seen by them."

Consequently, when he says "the Jews therefore were seeking him at the feast day," he sets down the occasion of manifesting the origin of spiritual teaching, and he sets down two occasions: one caused by the dissension of the crowds, the other from their admiration, at the point "but now, the feast day being in the midst, Jesus went up into the temple," etc.

The dissension of the crowds concerned their opinion about Christ; whence concerning this he does three things. First he sets forth that in which all agreed; second, that in which they differed, at the point "and there was much murmuring in the crowd about him"; third, whose opinion prevailed among them, at the point "yet no one spoke openly of him for fear of the Jews."

Now all agreed in this, that they were seeking him at the feast day, and were saying: "Where is he?" It is clear that out of much hatred and enmity they did not even wish to name him. Genesis 37:4: "They hated him, and could not speak peaceably to him."

But they differed, because some were seeking him out of a desire to learn, according to that saying, Psalm 68:33: "Seek him, and your soul shall live"; others were seeking him out of a desire to do him harm, according to that saying, Psalm 39:14: "They seek my soul, to take it away." And therefore "there was much murmuring" in the crowd, concerning the contention that was about him in the crowd. And although "murmur" is of neuter gender, yet Jerome puts it in the masculine, because ancient grammar had this usage, or so as to show that divine Scripture is not subject to the rules of Priscian.

And there was dissension, because "some," from the crowd, namely those who had an upright heart, "said," of Christ, "that he is good." Psalm 72:1: "How good is God to Israel, to those who are upright of heart!" Lamentations 3:25: "The Lord is good to those who hope in him, to the soul that seeks him." "Others," namely those who were ill-disposed, "said, No," namely he is not good. But by this it is given to be understood that the multitude considered him good; but the chief priests considered him evil, and therefore they say, "but he seduces the crowds." Luke 23:2: "We have found this man subverting our nation"; Matthew 27:63: "We have remembered that that seducer said," etc.

Now it must be known that to seduce is to lead aside. But a man can be led aside either from truth or from falsehood; and in either way someone can be called a seducer. Either insofar as he leads aside from the truth; and in this way it does not fit Christ, because he himself is the truth, etc., below, John 14:6. Or from falsehood; and in this way Christ is called a seducer; Jeremiah 20:7: "You have seduced me, O Lord, and I have been seduced; you were stronger than me, and you have prevailed." And would that we were all called and were such seducers, as Augustine says.

But he is called a seducer more properly who seduces and deceives from the truth: because he is said to be led aside who is drawn away from the common way. But truth is the common way; whereas heresy and the way of the wicked are certain byways.

But the opinion of the wicked, namely the chief priests, prevailed, whence there follows "yet no one spoke openly." And this, because the crowds were held in check by fear of the chief priests; because, as is said below, John 9:22, if anyone should confess him to be the Christ, he was put out of the synagogue. From which is clear the malice of those who ruled, by which they lay in wait for Christ, and of those who were subject, namely the people, because they did not have freedom to say what they felt.

Consequently, when he says "but now, the feast day being in the midst, Jesus went up into the temple," the second occasion of manifesting the teaching is set down, which is taken from the admiration of the crowds: and first the matter of the admiration is set down; second, the admiration itself; and third, the reason for the admiration.

Now the matter of the admiration is Christ's teaching; whence concerning this both the time and the place are set down. The time, when he says "but now, the feast day being in the midst," that is, when as many days of that feast remained as had passed; whence, since the feast was celebrated for seven days, this is said to have been on the fourth day. And indeed in the fact that he hid himself, there is an indication of Christ's humanity, and an instruction for our virtue, as has been said; but the fact that he made himself manifest, and they could not restrain him, is a showing-forth of his divinity.

Now he went up in the middle time of the feast for this reason, that at the beginning of the feast all are more attentive to those things that belong to the feast — the good indeed to the worship of God, but others to vanities and gains. But around the middle of the time, once the things belonging to the feast are dispatched, they are more prepared for teaching. Therefore, so as to find them more attentive and more prepared for teaching, he did not go up in the first days. Likewise also because this fits the order of Christ's teaching: because he came, not at the end of the world, nor at the beginning, but in the middle of time, to instruct men concerning the kingdom of God, according to that saying, Habakkuk 3:2: "In the midst of the years you will make it known."

Now the place of the teaching is shown when he says "in the temple," where he taught for two reasons: namely, so as to show that he was teaching the truth, which they could not slander, and which was necessary for all; below, John 18:20: "I have spoken nothing in secret"; second, because the temple, since it is a sacred place, is fitting for Christ's most holy teaching. Isaiah 2:3: "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us his ways, and we will walk in his paths."

But what Christ taught, the Evangelist passes over; because, as has been said, the Evangelists do not express all the deeds and words of the Lord, but those which produced commotion and contradiction among the people. And therefore here he makes mention of the commotion of the people arising from the teaching itself: namely because those who had before said "he seduces the crowds" were afterward, from the teaching itself, moved to admiration.

And therefore, consequently, when he says "and the Jews marveled," their admiration is set down. Nor is it a wonder, because this is said in Psalm 118:129: "Wonderful are your testimonies." For the words of Christ are the words of divine wisdom.

But the reason for the admiration is added when he says, "How does this man know letters, since he has not learned?" For they knew Jesus to be the son of a poor woman; and he was thought to be the son of a carpenter, who, living by his own labor, would not have applied himself to the study of letters, but rather to manual work; according to that saying, Psalm 87:16: "I am poor, and in labors from my youth." And therefore, when they hear him teaching and disputing, they marvel, saying, "How does this man know letters, since he has not learned?" A similar thing is found in Matthew 13:54: "Whence has this man this wisdom and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter's son?"

Having set down the place and occasions of manifesting the origin of spiritual teaching, here he consequently manifests the origin of that teaching itself, and first he shows that the origin of spiritual teaching is from God; second he invites them to receive it, at the point "on the last day of the great feast Jesus stood and cried out."

Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the origin of the teaching; second, the origin of the teacher, at the point "some of the Jerusalemites therefore said," etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the origin of the teaching; second he excludes an objection, at the point "did not Moses give you the law?" Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows the origin of the teaching; second he proves it, at the point "if anyone is willing to do his will, he shall know concerning the teaching."

He says therefore, "Jesus answered them and said," as if to say: you marvel whence I have knowledge; but I say, that "my teaching is not mine." If he had said "the teaching that I speak is not mine," there would be no question; but the fact that he says "mine is not mine" seems to imply a contradiction. But this is resolved, because this can be said in many ways.

Whence his teaching can in one way be called his, and in another way not his. For if it be understood of Christ the Son of God, then, since the teaching of anyone is nothing other than his word, but the Son of God is the Father's Word, it follows therefore that the Father's teaching is the Son himself. Now the same Word is his own by identity of substance. For what is yours, if not you yourself? But it is not his own by origin. For what is not yours more than you, if you belong to someone, whatever you are? As Augustine says. This therefore, briefly, seems to be what he said: "my teaching is not mine"; as if he were saying: I am not from myself. In which the Sabellian heresy is confounded, who dared to say that he who is the Son is the same as he who is the Father.

Or: "my teaching," which I pronounce by a created word, "is not mine, but his who sent me," the Father's; that is, it is not mine from myself, but from the Father, because even the Son has knowledge, through eternal generation, from the Father; Matthew 2:27: "all things have been delivered to me by my Father."

But if it be understood of Christ the Son of Man, then he says "my teaching," which I have according to my created soul, and utter with the mouth of my body, "is not mine," that is, it is not mine from myself, but from God: because every truth, by whomsoever it is spoken, is from the Holy Spirit. Thus therefore, according to Augustine, in Book I On the Trinity, in one respect he called the teaching his own, and in another respect not his own: according to the form of God it is his own, according to the form of a servant it is not his own. From which we have an example, that we should acknowledge all our knowledge, with thanksgiving, as being from God; 1 Corinthians 4:7: "What do you have that you have not received? But if you have received it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?"

Consequently, when he says "if anyone is willing to do his will, he shall know concerning the teaching," etc., he proves that his teaching is from God: and this in two ways. First from the judgment of those who rightly perceive; second from his own intention, at the point "he who speaks from himself seeks his own glory."

Concerning the first it must be known, that one must stand by the judgment of him as to whether someone works well in some art, who is experienced in that art: just as, whether someone speaks French well, one must stand by the judgment of him who is skilled in the French language. According to this, then, the Lord says: one must stand by the judgment of him, as to whether my teaching is from God, who is experienced in divine matters, for such a one can rightly judge concerning these things; 1 Corinthians 2:14: "the natural man does not perceive the things that are of the Spirit of God, but the spiritual man judges all things." And therefore he says: because you are alienated from God, therefore you do not know concerning the teaching whether it be from God.

"But if anyone is willing to do his," that is God's, "will," this one can know whether this teaching is from God, "or whether I speak from myself." Now he indeed speaks from himself who says what is false; because, as is said below, John 8:44, "when he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own."

Or otherwise, according to Chrysostom. For the will of God is peace, charity, and our humility; whence Matthew 5:9 it is said: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God." But the zeal of contention frequently perverts the mind of man, to such an extent that he considers the true to be false. Whence, once the spirit of contention is laid aside, the certainty of truth is more rightly held; Job 6:29: "Answer, I beseech you, without contention, and speaking that which is just, judge." And therefore the Lord says: if anyone wishes to judge rightly concerning my teaching, let him do his will; that is, let him lay aside the anger, envy, and hatred which he has toward me without cause. And there is nothing to prevent him from knowing whether it be from God, or whether I speak from myself, that is, that they are the words of God which I speak.

Or otherwise, according to Augustine. The will of God is that we do his works, just as it is the will of the master of a household that his laborers do his work. Now the work of God is that we believe in him whom he himself has sent; above, John 6:29: "this is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent." Therefore he says, "if anyone is willing to do his," namely God's, "will," that is, to believe in me, this one will know whether my teaching is from God. Isaiah 7:9, according to another reading: "unless you believe, you shall not understand."

Consequently, when he says "he who speaks from himself seeks his own glory," he proves the same thing from his own intention. And he sets down a twofold intention, by which is understood a twofold origin of teaching. Now it has been said that some speak from themselves, but others speak not from themselves.

Now whoever strives to speak the truth speaks not from himself. All knowledge of truth is from another: either by way of instruction, as from a teacher; or by way of revelation, as from God; or by way of discovery, as from the things themselves, because, as is said in Romans 1:20: "the invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made." Thus therefore, in whichever of these ways some knowledge is had, it is not from the man himself.

But he speaks from himself who has received the things he says neither from things nor from human teaching, but from his own heart; Jeremiah 23:16: "they speak the vision of their own heart"; Ezekiel 13:3: "Woe to the foolish prophets who prophesy out of their own heart." Thus therefore, to fabricate something from oneself is for the sake of human glory: because, as Chrysostom says, whoever wishes to teach some doctrine of his own wants this for no other reason than that he may acquire glory.

And this is what the Lord says, proving that his teaching is from God. "He who speaks from himself," apart from the sure knowledge of truth which is from another, this one seeks his own glory, for the sake of which, and for the sake of pride, heresies and false opinions are introduced. And this befits Antichrist; 2 Thessalonians 2:4: "who opposes and is lifted up above all that is called God or that is worshiped."

"But he who seeks the glory of him who sent him," as I seek — below, John 8:50: "I do not seek my own glory" — "this one is truthful, and there is no injustice in him." I am truthful, because my teaching contains the truth; there is no injustice in me, because I do not usurp another's glory. And, as Augustine says, he offered us a great example of humility, in that, being found in the condition of a man, he seeks the glory of the Father, not his own: which you, O man, ought to do. When you do something good, you seek your own glory; when you do something evil, you contrive a slander against God. But it is clear that he was not seeking his own glory; because if he had not been an adversary to the chief priests, they would not have persecuted him.

Thus therefore Christ, and whoever seeks the glory of God, has indeed in his intellect knowledge — Matthew 20:16: "Master, we know that you are truthful" — and therefore he says here "this one is truthful"; but in effect a right intention, whence he says "and there is no injustice in him." For injustice is that a man usurp to himself what belongs to another; but glory belongs properly to God alone: whoever therefore seeks glory for himself is unjust.

Consequently, when he says "did not Moses give you the law?" he excludes an objection. For someone could say to Christ, that his teaching was not from God for this reason, that he broke the Sabbath, according to that saying below, John 9:16: "this man is not from God, who does not keep the Sabbath." And this he intends to exclude; whence concerning this he does three things. First he excuses himself, arguing from the side of the accusers; second their wicked response is shown, at the point "the crowd answered," etc.; third he excuses himself by an argument, at the point "Jesus answered and said to them: I have done one work, and you all marvel."

He says therefore: granted, as you say, that my teaching is not from God, because I do not keep the law, breaking the Sabbath; nevertheless you have no cause for accusing, since you are in a like fault. Whence he says, "did not Moses give you," that is, your people, "the law? And yet none of you keeps," that is, observes, "the law"; Acts 7:53: "you received the law by the ordinance of angels, and you have not kept it." Whence also Peter, Acts 15:10: "this is a burden which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear."

If therefore you do not keep the law, why, on account of a transgression of it, do you wish to kill me? For you do not do this for this reason, but out of hatred: otherwise, if you were acting out of zeal for the law, you yourselves would keep it; Wisdom 2:12: "let us lie in wait for the just one, because he is not useful to us, and is contrary to our works, and reproaches us with the sins of the law"; and there follows: "let us condemn him to a most shameful death."

Or it may be said, that you do not keep the law which Moses gave you: and this is clear in the fact that you wish to kill me, which is against the law; Exodus 20:13: "You shall not kill." Or otherwise, according to Augustine: you do not do the law, because I myself am contained in the law; above, John 5:46: "if you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me also; for he wrote of me." But you wish to kill me.

Consequently, the wicked response of the crowd is set down, when he says, "the crowd answered, and said: You have a demon." Now the crowd truly answers things that do not pertain to order, but to disturbance, as Augustine says: for they say that he has a demon who casts out demons, Matthew 12:24.

And therefore, consequently, when he says "I have done one work, and you all marvel," the Lord, tranquil in his own truth, confutes them, excusing himself by an argument; and first he reminds them of the deed on account of which they are disturbed; second he shows that they ought not to be disturbed, at the point "therefore Moses gave you circumcision"; third he brings them to just judgment, at the point "do not judge according to appearance," etc.

Jesus therefore answered, and said to them: "I have done one work, and you all marvel." He did not return reviling for reviling, nor did he repel them, because "when he was reviled, he did not revile in return"; but he reminds them of the deed concerning the healing of the paralytic, at which they all marveled, not with the admiration of devotion, according to that saying, Isaiah 60:5: "you shall see and abound, and your heart shall marvel and be enlarged," but with the admiration of disturbance, according to that saying, Wisdom 5:2: "seeing it they shall be troubled with terrible fear, and shall marvel at the suddenness of the unlooked-for salvation."

If therefore you marvel because of one work, that is, are disturbed with disturbance, what would you do if you saw all my works? For, as Augustine says, it was his works that they were seeing in the world: all the sick also are healed by him; Psalm 106:20: "he sent his word, and healed them"; Wisdom 16:12: "neither herb nor poultice healed them, but your word, O Lord, which heals all things." Therefore you are disturbed for this reason, that you see only one work, and not all.

Consequently, when he says "therefore Moses gave you circumcision," he convicts them of unjust disturbance, and first he sets down the commandment given to them by Moses; second, their deed; and third he argues from both. Now the commandment of Moses is concerning circumcision; and therefore he says, "therefore," that is, to signify my works, "Moses gave you circumcision." For circumcision was given as a sign, as is had in Genesis 17:2: "it shall be to you a sign of the covenant between me and you": for it signified Christ; and therefore it was always given in the member of generation, because from Abraham, according to the flesh, Christ was to descend, who effects spiritual circumcision, that is, of mind and body. Or it was done in that member for this reason, that it was given against original sin.

But that Moses gave circumcision is not expressly found, except Exodus 17:44: "every bought slave shall be circumcised." And although Moses gave circumcision, it was not as though instituting it: because he himself was not the first to receive the commandment of circumcision, but Abraham, as is had in Genesis 17:10.

Now the deed of the Jews is that they circumcised on the Sabbath; and this is what he says, "and you circumcise on the Sabbath," etc. And this for this reason, because it was commanded to Abraham that the child be circumcised on the eighth day; Genesis 21:4: "he circumcised him on the eighth day, as God had commanded him." But from Moses it had been commanded them that they should do no work on the Sabbath day. Now it happened sometimes that the eighth day, of necessity, fell on the Sabbath day; and thus, circumcising the child on that very day, they broke the commandment of Moses, for the sake of the commandment of the fathers.

And therefore from these things the Lord argues, when he says, "if a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the law of Moses may not be broken; are you angry at me, because I made a man completely whole on the Sabbath?" Here it must be noted, that this argument has its force from these three considerations, of which two are express, but the third is understood.

For we see, first, that although the commandment of Abraham was earlier, nevertheless the commandment of Moses concerning the observance of the Sabbath did not take precedence over the earlier one, namely the commandment concerning circumcision; Galatians 3:17: "now this I say, that the covenant confirmed by God, the law, which was made four hundred and thirty years after, does not annul." And therefore from this he argues: because although in human laws later things take precedence over earlier ones, nevertheless in divine matters the earlier things are of greater authority. And therefore the commandment given to Abraham concerning circumcision is not prejudiced by the commandment of Moses concerning the observance of the Sabbath. Much less, therefore, is it prejudiced in my case, who do what was disposed by God, before the constitution of the world, concerning the salvation of men, figured in the Sabbath.

Another consideration is, that the Jews had a commandment that they should not work on the Sabbath; and yet the Jews did work those things that pertained to a particular salvation. He says therefore: if you, to whom it is commanded that you do nothing on the Sabbath, receive circumcision on that very day, which is a certain particular salvation (whence also it was done in a particular member), and you do this, so that the law of Moses may not be broken (from which it is clear, that the things that pertain to salvation are not to be omitted on the Sabbath) — then much more ought a man to do, on that very day, those things that are for the salvation of all. You ought not, therefore, to be indignant at me, because I made a man completely whole on the Sabbath.

The third consideration is, that both commandments were a figure: for "all these things happened to them in figure," 1 Corinthians 10:11. If therefore the figure, namely the commandment concerning the observance of the Sabbath, is not prejudicial to the figure, namely the commandment of circumcision, much less is it prejudicial to the truth. For circumcision itself prefigured the Lord, as Augustine says.

Now he says "the whole man" for this reason, that, since the works of God are perfect, he was healed so as to be sound in body, and he believed so as to be sound in soul.

Consequently, when he says "do not judge according to appearance," etc., he brings them back to a just examination of themselves: namely, that they should not judge according to appearance, but with just judgment. Now someone is said to judge according to appearance in two ways. For a judge judges according to what is alleged; 1 Samuel 15:7: "men see the things that appear." But in this there can be deception; and therefore he says "do not judge according to appearance," that is, according to that which immediately appears, but inquire diligently; Job 29:16: "the cause which I did not know, I searched out diligently"; Isaiah 11:3: "he shall not judge according to the sight of the eyes."

Or otherwise, "do not judge according to appearance," that is, do not accept a person in judgment: for this is forbidden to all who judge; Exodus 23:6: "you shall not accept the person of the poor in judgment"; Malachi 2:9: "you accept faces in judgment." Now to accept a person in judgment is to set aside just judgment on account of love, or reverence, or fear, or the condition of the person, which do not pertain to the case.

He says therefore "do not judge," as if to say: not because Moses has greater glory among you than I, should you pass sentence from the dignity of persons, but from the nature of things: because the things that I do are greater than the things that Moses did. But it must be noted, according to Augustine, that he does not judge partially who loves equally. For when we honor men in different ways according to their ranks, it is not to be feared that we are accepting a person.

After he has treated of the origin of the teaching, he next treats of the origin of the teacher; and first Christ shows his principle from which he proceeds, second his end to which he goes, at the place "yet a little while I am with you." Concerning the first he does three things. First the doubt of the crowds concerning his origin is proposed; second the teaching of that very origin is set down, at the place "Jesus therefore cried out in the temple"; third the effect of the teaching is set down, at the place "they sought therefore to lay hold of him." Concerning the first he does three things. First the admiration of the crowd is set down; second their suspicion, at the place "have the rulers indeed known that this is the Christ?" Third their objection against what they were suspecting is brought in, at the place "but we know," and so on. Now the admiration of the crowds arises from two things. First from the iniquitous purpose of the rulers; second from the public teaching of Christ, at the place "behold, he speaks openly." Now it was said above that Christ, in order to show the weakness of human nature, went up to the feast day secretly; but in order to show the person of his divinity, he teaches publicly in the temple, and cannot be laid hold of by those who persecute him. And thus, as Augustine says, the power appears which was thought to be timidity. And therefore some of Jerusalem said, as if in admiration—for they themselves knew with what savagery he was sought by the rulers, being as it were of the household and dwelling in Jerusalem. Whence Chrysostom says: more pitiable than all were those who, seeing the greatest sign of divinity, yet handing everything over to the judgment of the corrupt rulers, revered Christ the less, according to that word of Ecclesiasticus 10:2: "what manner of man the ruler of a city is, such also are they that dwell therein." But nevertheless they marveled by what power he was not laid hold of; whence they also said, "is not this he whom the Jews seek?"—that is, the rulers, according to that above, John 5:16: "therefore the Jews"—that is, the rulers—"persecuted him, because he did these things on the sabbath"; Daniel 13:5: "iniquity came out from the ancients of the people, that seemed to govern the people." Now through this the truth of Christ's words appears, and the falsity of the rulers. For above, when the Lord said to them, "why do you seek to kill me?" they denied it, saying: "you have a devil; who seeks to kill you?" But behold, what the rulers were denying, these people confess when they say "him whom the Jews seek to kill." So then they marvel from the iniquitous purpose of the rulers. Likewise also from the public teaching of Christ: whence they say "behold, he speaks openly," teaching—namely Christ—which is an indication of secure truth; below, John 18:20: "I have spoken openly"; "and yet they say nothing to him," as if restrained by divine power. For this is the proper power of God, that he restrains the hearts of the wicked from the onset of their own malice; Proverbs 16:7: "when the ways of man shall please the Lord, he will convert even his enemies to peace." And elsewhere: "the heart of kings is in the hand of God: whithersoever he will he shall turn it."

Their suspicion is set down when he says "have the rulers indeed known that this is the Christ?" As if they were saying: before, they sought to kill him; now they have found him, and yet they say nothing to him; yet they were not changed from their own opinion, because, as it is said in 1 Corinthians 2:8: "if they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory"; but they were restrained by divine power. Their objection against the suspicion is subjoined, "but we know this man, whence he is," as if arguing in this way: Christ ought to have a hidden origin; but this man has a manifest origin: therefore he is not the Christ. In this their folly appears, because, granted that even some of the rulers believed in Christ, they nevertheless do not follow their opinion, but bring forward another, corrupted one; Ezekiel 5:5: "this is Jerusalem, I have set her in the midst of the nations." For they knew that Christ was from Mary according to his origin, but they were ignorant of the manner of it; Matthew 13:55: "is not his father Joseph, and his mother called Mary?" But since it is said in Micah 5:2: "out of thee shall come forth a leader, who shall rule my people Israel," why do they say "when the Christ comes, no man knows whence he is"? I respond. It must be said that they have this from the word of Isaiah 53:8: "who shall declare his generation?" So then they have it from the prophets that they know whence he is, according to human origin; and from these same prophets they have it that they do not know, according to divine generation.

Next, when he says "Jesus therefore cried out in the temple," he manifests his origin, and first he shows in what respect his origin is known, and in what respect unknown; second he teaches how we can arrive at knowledge of him, at the place "I know him," and so on. Concerning the first he does two things. First he shows what they knew concerning his origin; second what they were ignorant of concerning it, at the place "and I am not come of myself." Now they knew Jesus' origin; and therefore he says "Jesus cried out." Now a cry proceeds from greatness of feeling. And therefore it sometimes implies a turbulence of mind stirred up within: and in this way it does not befit Christ, of whom it is written, Isaiah 42:2: "he shall not cry, nor accept any person, neither shall his voice be heard abroad"; Ecclesiastes 9:17: "the words of the wise are heard in silence." Sometimes it implies greatness of devotion, according to that word of Psalm 119:1: "in my trouble I cried to the Lord." But sometimes, together with this, it implies the greatness of the things to be said, according to that word of Isaiah 6:3: "the Seraphim cried one to another, and said: holy, holy, holy, the Lord God of hosts"; Proverbs 8:1: "doth not wisdom cry aloud, and prudence put forth her voice?" And thus preachers are admonished to cry out, Isaiah 58:1: "cry, cease not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet." And thus the Lord here cried out, teaching in the temple, and saying, namely, "you both know me," you know me by face, "and you know whence I am"—namely bodily; Baruch 3:38: "afterwards he was seen upon earth." For they knew that he was born of Mary in Bethlehem, and reared in Nazareth; but they did not know the virgin's childbearing, and that he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, as Augustine says. Except for the virgin's childbearing, they knew in Jesus everything that pertains to man.

But they were ignorant concerning his hidden origin: whence he says "and I am not come of myself," and first he intimates his origin; second he shows that it is hidden to them. Now his origin is from the Father from eternity: whence he says "I am not come of myself," as if to say: I was before, according to my divinity, than I would come into the world through my humanity; below, John 8:58: "before Abraham was made, I am." Otherwise it would not befit him to come, unless he had been before; and yet this very fact that I have come, I have not come of myself: because the Son is not of himself, but of the Father; below, John 16:28: "I came out from the Father, and I came into the world." Now his origin from the Father was foretold, who promised to send him; Exodus 4:13: "I beseech thee, Lord, send whom thou wilt send"; Isaiah 19:20: "I will send them a saviour and a defender to deliver them." And therefore he says "but he that sent me is true," as if to say: I have not come from elsewhere, but from him who promised, and fulfilled the promise, because he is true; Romans 3:4: "but God is true," and therefore he teaches me to speak the truth, because I am sent by the true one. Now he is hidden to them, because they do not know him who sent me; whence he says "whom you know not." But since every man, although born in the flesh, is from God, it seems that he could say: I am from God, and consequently: you know whence I am. The response must be given, according to Hilary, that the Son is from God otherwise than other men are, because he is so from God that he is also God: whence God is his consubstantial principle. But others are indeed from God, yet they are not of him. So then whence the Son is, is unknown, because the nature from which he is, is not known; but whence men are is not unknown, because it cannot be unknown whence anything that subsists comes from something.

Next, when he says "I know him," he teaches how one can arrive at knowledge of him from whom he is. For it is necessary that we learn something from him who knows it; but only the Son knows the Father, and therefore he says: if you wish to have knowledge of him who sent me, it is necessary that you have it from me, because I alone know him. And so first he shows his knowledge; second the perfection of his knowledge; third the reason for his knowledge. He shows his knowledge when he says "I know him," and so on. Now it is true that "all men see him," as it is said in Job 36:25, but nevertheless in different ways, because men in this life see him through creatures; Romans 1:20: "the invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made." Therefore it is said, 1 Corinthians 13:12: "we see now through a glass in a dark manner." But the angels and the blessed in the homeland see him immediately through his essence; Matthew 18:10: "their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven"; 1 John 3:2: "we shall see him as he is." But the Son of God sees him more excellently than all, namely with the vision of comprehension; above, John 1:18: "no man hath seen God at any time"—namely by comprehending—"the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him"; Matthew 11:27: "neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son." And of this vision he speaks here, saying "I know him," namely with knowledge of comprehension.

But he shows the perfection of his knowledge when he says "if I shall say that I know him not, I shall be like to you, a liar." Now he introduces this on account of two things: for intellectual creatures know him, but from afar, and imperfectly, because "every one beholdeth him afar off," as it is said in Job 36:25. For divine truth exceeds all knowledge; 1 John 3:20: "God is greater than our heart." Whoever therefore knows God can say, without lying, "I know him not": because he does not know him as much as he is knowable. But the Son knows God the Father most perfectly, just as he most perfectly knows himself: whence he cannot say "I know him not." Likewise, because knowledge of God, and especially that which is through grace, can be lost; according to that word of Psalm 105:21: "they forgot God, who redeemed them," whence they can say "I know him not," so long as they are in this life: because no one knows whether he is worthy of hatred or of love. But the Son has unlosable knowledge of the Father, whence he cannot say "I know him not." Now in this, that he says "I shall be like to you, a liar," the likeness must be taken by way of contrary. For they would not be liars if they said that they did not know God; but rather if they said that they knew God, when they are ignorant of him. But if Christ said that he did not know him, when he does know him, he would be a liar. The sense of the word is therefore: "if I shall say that I know him not," when I do know him, "I shall be like to you, a liar"—you who say that you know him, when nevertheless you are ignorant of him.

But could Christ not have said "I know him not"? It seems that he could, because he could move his lips, and utter words of this kind: therefore he can be a liar. But it must be said that Christ did utter words of this kind, and yet was not a liar: which must be understood in this way: if I shall say, "I know him not," with assertion, that is, in such a way that I believe in my heart what I utter with my mouth. Now to assert the false as true happens from a twofold defect: namely from a defect of knowledge in the intellect; and this defect could not be in Christ, since he is the wisdom of God, as it is said in 1 Corinthians 1:30. Likewise from a defect of right will in the affections; which likewise could not be in Christ, since he is the power of God, as is said in the same place. Whence he could not say, by way of assertion, "I know him not." Nor is the conditional statement false, even though the antecedent is impossible, and the consequent as well.

Now the reason for Christ's singular and perfect knowledge is set down when he says "but I know him, because I am from him, and he hath sent me." For all knowledge is through some likeness, since nothing is known except insofar as a likeness of the thing known is in the knower; but everything that proceeds from something has a likeness of that from which it proceeds, whence all who truly know, according to the diverse degree of their procession from God, have knowledge of him in diverse ways. Now the rational soul has knowledge of God insofar as it participates in his likeness in a certain more imperfect way than other intellectual creatures. The angel, because he has a more express likeness of God, since he is a seal of likeness, knows God more manifestly. But the Son has the most perfect likeness of the Father, since he is of the same essence and power with him; and therefore he knows most perfectly, as has been said. And therefore he says "but I know him," namely as much as he is knowable. And the reason for this is because "I am from him," as it were having the same essence of nature with him through consubstantiality. Whence, just as he himself perfectly knows himself through his own essence, so also through that same essence "I know him," perfectly. But lest this be referred to the mission by which he came into the world, he immediately subjoined "and he hath sent me": so that what he says, "I am from him," may be referred to the eternal generation, through which he is consubstantial with the Father. From which the property of knowledge is had from the property of generation. But through this, that he says "he hath sent me," he intimates that the Father is the author of the incarnation; Galatians 4:4: "God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." Now just as through this, that the Son is from the Father, he has perfect knowledge of the Father; so also through this, that the soul of Christ is singularly united to the Word, it has a singular and more excellent knowledge of God than other creatures, although it does not comprehend him. And therefore Christ can say, according to his human nature: I know him more excellently than all creatures, yet not by comprehending.

Next, when he says "they sought therefore to lay hold of him," the effect of the teaching is treated, first as regards the crowds; second as regards the Pharisees, at the place "the Pharisees heard the people murmuring." Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets down the effect of the teaching among the malevolent crowds; second among the devout crowds, at the place "but of the people many believed in him." Concerning the first he does three things. First he suggests the iniquitous purpose of the crowds; second the impediment to the purpose's being fulfilled; and third the reason for the impediment. Now the iniquity of the purpose is manifested when he says "they sought therefore to lay hold of him." For because the Lord had said "whom you know not," the Jews were angered, as though he were pretending that they knew him, and therefore they proposed iniquitous things, namely to lay hold of him, in order to crucify and kill him, according to that word of Psalm 70:11: "pursue and take him." But there are some who, having Christ within themselves, nevertheless seek to lay hold of him in a pious way; Song of Songs 7:8: "I will go up into the palm tree, and will take hold of the fruit thereof." Whence the Apostle also said, Philippians 3:12: "I follow after, if by any means I may apprehend, wherein I am also apprehended by Christ Jesus."

He sets down the impediment to the purpose when he says "but no man laid hands on him." For their fury was invisibly checked and restrained. Through which it is clear that the will to harm belongs to each one from himself, but the power to harm is from God, which is clear from Job 1 and 2, where Satan could not afflict Job except insofar as it was permitted to him by God. The reason for the impediment is assigned, because "his hour was not yet come." Whence it must be known that, according to that word of Ecclesiastes 8:6: "there is a time and opportunity for every business." Now the time for each thing is determined from its own cause. Because therefore the cause of corporeal effects are the heavenly bodies, therefore in those things that are done corporeally, the hour is determined from the heavenly bodies; but the soul, since according to intellect and reason it is subject to no heavenly bodies, since in this respect it transcends temporal causes, does not have hours determined from the heavenly bodies; but from its cause, namely God, who dispenses what is to be done at what time; Ecclesiasticus 33:7: "why doth one day excel another, and one light another, and one year another year, above the sun? By the knowledge of the Lord they were distinguished, he made the sun, and kept a precept." Much less therefore is Christ's hour determined by the bodies themselves. So then his hour must be understood, not from fatal necessity, but as predetermined by the whole Trinity: for, as Augustine says, this must not be believed even of you; how much more of him through whom you were made? If your hour is his will, namely God's; his hour, what is it but his own will? Therefore he did not speak of the hour at which he would be compelled to die, but at which he would deign to be killed. Above, John 2:4: "my hour is not yet come"; below, John 13:1: "Jesus knowing that his hour was come, that he should pass out of this world to the Father," and so on.

Next, when he says "but of the people many believed in him," he sets down the effect of the teaching among the devout crowds. And first their faith is set down, because "many of the people believed in him." He does not say "of the rulers": because the greater they were, the more they were distant, and therefore in them wisdom had no place, because, as it is said in Proverbs 11:2: "where humility is, there also is wisdom." But the crowd, because it quickly saw its own sickness, recognized the Lord's medicine without delay; Matthew 11:25: "thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them to little ones." And on account of this, in the beginning the humble and the poor were converted to Christ; 1 Corinthians 1:28: "the base things of the world, and the things that are contemptible, hath God chosen, and things that are not, that he might bring to nought things that are." Second he sets down the motive to faith when he says "when the Christ cometh, shall he do more miracles than these which this man doth?" For it had been prophesied that Christ at his coming would perform many miracles; Isaiah 35:4-5: "God himself will come, and will save us: then shall the eyes of the blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped," and so on. And therefore, seeing the miracles that Christ was doing, they were led toward faith in him. But nevertheless their faith was weak, because they were moved to believe in him not from the teaching, but from the signs; whereas they, who were already faithful, and instructed by the Law, ought rather to have been moved by the teaching, for as it is said in 1 Corinthians 14:22: "signs are given to unbelievers, but prophecies not to unbelievers, but to believers." Second, because they still seem to be expecting another Christ; whence they say "when the Christ cometh, shall he do more miracles than these which this man doth?" Whence it is clear that they did not believe in Christ as in God, but as in some just man, or a prophet. Or, according to Augustine, they reason syllogistically: "when the Christ cometh, shall he do more miracles?" As if they were saying: Christ is promised to come, but he will not do more miracles than this man does here: therefore either this man is the Christ, or there will be several Christs.

Next, when he says "the Pharisees heard the people murmuring these things concerning him," the effect among the Pharisees is set down. And, as Chrysostom says, Christ said many things, and yet they were not moved against him. But when they see the crowd acquiescing to him, immediately they are stirred up against him, and, raging, desired to kill him. From which it is clear that the breaking of the sabbath was not the true cause of their hatred, but this bit at them most of all, that the crowds were glorifying Christ. And this is clear below, chapter 12:19: "do you see that we prevail nothing? Behold, the whole world is gone after him." But because they themselves did not dare to seize Christ, fearing danger, they send officers, as men exposed to dangers.

After the Lord had set down the principle of his origin, here he consequently intimates its term — namely, that to which he is about to go by means of death — and first the term of Christ's way is intimated; secondly, the crowds' wonder at his words is set down, where it says, "The Jews therefore said among themselves," and so on. Concerning the first he does three things. First he intimates the term of his life; secondly he foretells the future longing of the crowds, where it says, "you shall seek me, and shall not find me"; thirdly he adds their deficiency, where it says, "and where I am, you cannot come." Concerning the first he does two things. First he foretells the postponement of his death; secondly he hints at whither he is about to go by means of death, where it says, "and I go to the Father," etc.: and thus in the first he shows his power; in the second, his will to suffer. He shows his power indeed in the postponement of his death, because, although the Jews sought to seize him, they were nevertheless unable to do this unless Christ willed it; below, chapter 10:18: "No one takes my soul from me, but I lay it down.." And therefore Jesus said to them, "Yet a little while I am with you"; as if to say: you wish to kill me, but this is not placed in your will, but in mine, and I determine that I am still with you for a little while; therefore wait a short time. What you wish to do now, you shall do: for "yet a little while I am with you." In this indeed the Lord makes satisfaction, first to the crowd that revered him, making it more eager to hear him, as it were left for a short time, in which they might avail themselves of this teaching, as Chrysostom says. Below, chapter 12, verse 36: "While you have the light, believe in the light." Secondly, to the crowd that persecuted him, as if to say: your desire for my death is not deferred for long, wherefore bear it patiently, because it is still but a little. For I must fulfill my dispensation — namely, by preaching and by working miracles — and thus arrive at the passion; Luke 13:32: "Go, and tell that fox, that today and tomorrow I work, and the third day I am consummated.." Now there is a threefold cause why Christ willed to preach for so short a time. The first, to demonstrate his power, in that in so short a time he would change the whole world; Psalm 83:11: "For better is one day in your courts above thousands." The second is to arouse the desire of the disciples, namely that they might desire him the more whom they were to have for a little while by bodily presence; Luke 17:22: "The days will come, when you shall desire one day of the Son of man.." The third is to increase the spiritual progress of the disciples. For since Christ's humanity is for us the way of tending toward God, as is said below, chapter 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life," we ought not to rest in it as in a term, but through it we ought to tend toward God. Therefore, lest the hearts of the disciples, carnally affected toward Christ, should rest in him as in a man, Christ for this reason quickly withdrew his bodily presence from them; whence he said, below, chapter 16:7, "It is expedient for you that I go"; 2 Corinthians 5:16: "And if we have known Christ according to the flesh" — namely, at that time when he was with us bodily — "but now we know him so no longer." He shows the will of his passion when he says, "and I go to him that sent me," as one going spontaneously, namely through the passion; Isaiah 53:7: "He was offered because it was his own will"; Ephesians 5:2: "He offered himself a victim to God, for an odor of sweetness.." "I go," I say, "to the Father who sent me." And this fittingly: for anything whatsoever naturally returns to its own principle; Ecclesiastes 1:7: "Unto the place from which the rivers come, they return." Below, chapter 13:3: "Knowing that he was come from God, and goeth to God." And again, chapter 16:5: "I go to him that sent me."

Consequently, when he says, "you shall seek me, and shall not find me," he foretells the desire of the Jews, as if to say: it is but a little that you are able to enjoy my teaching; but this little, which you now reject, you shall someday seek, and shall not find; Isaiah 55:6: "Seek ye the Lord, while he may be found"; and in Psalm 68:33: "Seek ye the Lord," namely in the present, "and your soul shall live." Now this saying, "you shall seek me, and shall not find me," can be understood either of a bodily seeking of Christ, or of a spiritual one. If it be understood of the bodily seeking, then, according to Chrysostom, they sought him when the daughters of Jerusalem, that is, the women, mourned over him, as is said in Luke 23:27, and it is credible that many others suffered this then. Nor is it remote from the truth, because, with tribulation impending over the Jews, and especially when the city was being taken, mindful of Christ and of his miracles, they would desire his presence, by which they might be freed; and according to this it must be said, "you shall seek me" — that is, my bodily presence — "and shall not find me." But if it be understood of the spiritual seeking, it must be said, according to Augustine, that him whom they refused to know while present, they afterward sought when, seeing the multitude believing, and pricked at heart over the crime of Christ's death, they said to Peter, Acts 2:37: "What shall we do, men and brethren?" Thus, then, they sought Christ when they believed in him who forgave their crimes, whom they had seen dying by their own crime. Consequently, when he says, "and where I am, you cannot come," he shows their deficiency. Nor does he say "whither I go," which would be more consequent upon what was said before, namely "I go to the Father who sent me"; but he says "where I am," so as to show himself to be God and man. Man indeed, insofar as he goes — below, chapter 16:5, "I go to him that sent me" — but insofar as Christ was always there, whither he was to return, he shows himself to be God; above, chapter 3:13: "No man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven." Thus, then, according to Augustine, just as Christ returned so as not to abandon us, so he descended to us through the assumption of visible flesh, so that according to his invisible majesty he might also be in heaven. He does not, however, say "you shall not find," because some were about to go there too; but he says "you cannot come," namely for as long as you are so disposed. For no one can arrive at the heavenly inheritance unless he is an heir of God. Now one becomes an heir of God through faith in Christ; above, chapter 1:12: "He gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name." But the Jews did not yet believe in him; and therefore he says, "you cannot come." In Psalm 23:3 it is asked: "Who shall ascend into the mountain of the Lord?" And the answer is given: "the innocent in hands, and clean of heart." But the Jews were not clean of heart, nor innocent in hands, because they wished to kill Christ; therefore he says: you cannot ascend into the mountain of the Lord.

Consequently, when he says, "The Jews therefore said among themselves," the wonder of the Jews is set down, who, although they had a carnal understanding of Christ, nevertheless partly believed. And they do three things. First they wonder; secondly they suspect; and thirdly they argue against their own suspicion. They wonder indeed when they say among themselves, whither is he about to go, that we shall not find him? For, as has been said, they understood this carnally; 1 Corinthians 2:14: "The sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God." And therefore, that he was about to go, not indeed through death, but bodily, to some place to which it would not be lawful for them to ascend, they suspect on this matter, saying, "Will he go into the dispersion of the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?" For the Gentiles had been estranged from converse with the Jews; Ephesians 2:12: "Strangers to the testaments, having no hope of the promise, and without God in this world, alienated from the conversation of Israel." And therefore, as if reproaching them, they say "into the dispersion of the Gentiles," who were scattered everywhere, and imperfectly mingled with one another; Genesis 10:32: "These are the families of Noah, according to their peoples and nations: and by these were the nations divided on the earth after the flood." But the people of the Jews was gathered together in one place, and in the worship of one God, and in the observance of the law; Psalm 146:2: "The Lord buildeth up Jerusalem: he will gather together the dispersed of Israel." Nor do they say that he is about to go to the Gentiles as one who was to become a Gentile, but as one who was to bring them back: whence they add, "and teach the Gentiles." Which perhaps they took from Isaiah 49:6: "It is a small thing that thou shouldst be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to convert the dregs of Israel. Behold, I have given thee to be the light of the Gentiles, that thou mayst be my salvation even to the farthest part of the earth." Although, however, these men did not understand what they were saying, just as Caiphas also did not understand when he said, "It is expedient for you that one man should die, and not that the whole nation should perish," nevertheless they speak the truth, and foretold the salvation of the Gentiles, as Augustine says, in that he was about to go to the Gentiles, not by the presence of his body, but by his own feet, namely the apostles. For he sent his members to us, and made us his members; below, chapter 10:16: "Other sheep I have, that are not of this fold; them also I must bring... and there shall be one fold and one shepherd." And therefore in Isaiah 2:3 it is said, in the person of the Gentiles: "he will teach us his ways." But they object against what they suspect, saying, "What is this saying that he said: You shall seek me?" As if they said: if he had said "you shall seek me, and shall not find me, and where I am, you cannot come," it could indeed be understood that he was about to go to the Gentiles; but by the fact that he added, "where I am you cannot come," he seems to exclude this understanding. For it is not impossible for us to go to the Gentiles, and so on.

After the Lord has treated of the origin of his teaching and of the one teaching, as well as of its end, here he consequently invites to the teaching itself. First is set down Christ's invitation; second, the dissension of the crowds, where it says, "from that hour therefore," etc. Concerning the first he does three things. First is set down the manner of inviting; second, the invitation itself, where it says, "if anyone thirst, let him come to me"; third, an exposition is added, where it says, "but this he said of the Spirit." Now the manner of inviting is to be considered in three respects: namely as to the time of the invitation; as to the position of the one inviting; as to the effort of the one calling. As to the time, because it was "on the last, the great day of the festivity"; for, as has been said, that feast was celebrated for seven days, and the first and last days were the more solemn, just as among us the first day of a feast and the octave are the more solemn. This, then, which the Lord did here, he did not do on the first day, because he had not yet gone up to Jerusalem, nor on the intervening days, but on the last; and this because few are they who celebrate feasts in a spiritual manner; and therefore he does not invite them to the teaching from the beginning, lest through the vanities of the following festival days it be blotted out from their hearts, since, as is said in Luke 8:7, "the word of the Lord is choked by thorns" — but he invites them on the last day, so that it might be impressed more tenaciously upon their hearts. As to the position, because "Jesus stood." Here it must be known that Christ taught both sitting and standing. Sitting, indeed, he taught the disciples, Matthew 5:1; but standing, the crowds, as here. And from this a custom grew up in the Church, that preaching to the crowds be done standing, but to religious and clerics, sitting. The reason for this is that, since preaching to the crowds is, as it were, for converting them, it is done by way of exhortation; but when preaching is done to the clergy, as it were to those already existing in the house of God, it is a kind of commemoration. As to the effort of the one calling, because "he cried out," namely so as to show his security; Isaiah 40:9: "lift up your voice with strength... lift it up, fear not." And so that he might be heard by all; Isaiah 58:1: "cry, cease not, lift up your voice like a trumpet." And so as to show the greatness of the things to be said; Proverbs 8:6: "hear me, for I am about to speak of great things."

Consequently, when he says "if anyone thirst, let him come to me," the invitation is set down, and first he shows who are invited; second, what is the fruit of the invitation. Now those who thirst are invited; hence he says "if anyone thirst, let him come to me, and drink." Isaiah 55:1: "all you who thirst, come to the waters." He calls those who thirst for this reason, because such are they who desire to serve God. But God does not accept forced services; 2 Corinthians 9:7: "God loves a cheerful giver." And because of this it says in Psalm 53:8: "I will sacrifice freely." Of such it is said in Matthew 5:6: "blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice." And the Lord calls these not partially, but all; hence he says "if anyone thirst," as if to say, whoever he may be; Ecclesiasticus 24:26: "come over to me, all you that desire me, and be filled with my generations"; 1 Timothy 2:4: "he wills all men to be saved." Now he invites to drinking; hence he says "and drink." For this drink is spiritual refreshment in the knowledge of divine wisdom and truth, and also in the fulfillment of desires. Isaiah 65:13: "my servants shall drink, and you shall thirst"; Proverbs 9:5: "come, and eat my bread, and drink the wine which I have mingled for you"; Ecclesiasticus 15:3: "he shall give him the water of wholesome wisdom to drink." Now the fruit of this invitation is a redounding of goods to others; hence he says, "he who believes in me, as the Scripture says, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." This, indeed, according to Chrysostom, is to be read thus: "he who believes in me, as the Scripture says" — here you should make a subdivision by punctuation — and afterward follows "out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." For if you say "he who believes in me," and afterward there follows "as the Scripture says, rivers," etc., it does not seem fitting, because that which is said, "out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water," is not found in any book of the Old Testament. In this way, then, it should be said: "he who believes in me, as the Scripture says" — that is, according to the teachings of Scripture; above, verse 39: "search the Scriptures... it is they that give testimony of me." And then, "out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." And he says "he who believes in me," whereas above he had said "he who comes to me," because to believe and to come are the same thing; Psalm 33:6: "come to him, and be enlightened." According to Jerome, however, it is punctuated otherwise, thus: "he who believes in me," and afterward is added "as the Scripture says, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." Which, as he himself says, is taken from Proverbs; Proverbs 5:15: "drink water out of your own cistern, and the streams of your own well: let your fountains be conveyed abroad."

It must be known, moreover, according to Augustine, that rivers proceed from fountains as from a principle. Now he who drinks a bodily drink has in himself neither a fountain nor a river, because he tastes but a small portion of water; but he who drinks by believing in Christ draws in a fountain of water, which, once drawn, gives life to the conscience, which is the belly of the interior man, and it too will itself become a fountain. Hence it is said above, John 4:13: "he who shall drink of this water, in him it shall become a fountain of water springing up." Now this fountain which is drawn in is the Holy Spirit, of whom it is said in Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life." He, therefore, who drinks in such a way that it profits himself alone, the gifts of graces, which are signified by rivers, do not flow as living water out of his belly; but he who hastens to take counsel for his neighbor, and to communicate to others the diverse gifts of grace received from God, out of his belly flow rivers of living water. On account of which Peter says: "as every man has received grace, ministering the same one to another." Now he says "rivers" to signify the abundance of spiritual gifts promised to the faithful; Psalm 64:10: "the river of God is filled with water." Likewise their impetus; Isaiah 27:6: "they that come of Jacob shall blossom and bud, and shall fill the face of the world with seed"; and in Psalm 45:5: "the violence of the river makes the city of God joyful." Hence, because the Apostle was moved by the instinct and fervor of the Holy Spirit, he said: "the charity of Christ presses us"; and Romans 8:14: "they who are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." Likewise, the division of the gifts of the Holy Spirit: because, as is said in 1 Corinthians 12:10: "to another, kinds of tongues; to another, kinds of healings," and so on. Now rivers of this kind are living waters, because they are continuous with their principle, namely the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Consequently, when he says "but this he said of the Spirit," he explains what he had said; and first the explanation is set down; second, the reason for the explanation is assigned, where it says "for as yet the Spirit was not given." He says, then, that he said, "out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water." But the Evangelist says this must be understood of the Spirit "whom they should receive who believed in him," because he himself is the fountain of life and the river. The fountain, of which it is said in Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life, and in your light we shall see light." The river, indeed, because it proceeds from the Father and the Son. Apocalypse, last chapter, 1: "the angel showed me a river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb"; Isaiah 42:1: "he has given his Spirit," namely to those obedient to him.

He assigns the reason for this explanation, saying "for as yet the Spirit was not given"; and he says two things: namely, that the Spirit was not yet given, and that Christ was not yet glorified. Concerning the first there is a twofold opinion. For Chrysostom says that the Holy Spirit was not given to the apostles, as regards the gifts of prophecy and of miracles, before the resurrection of Christ. Hence this grace, which had been given to the prophets, had failed from the earth up until the coming of Christ, nor was it given to anyone thereafter until the aforesaid time. And if it is said that the apostles cast out demons before the resurrection, it must be understood that these were not cast out by the Spirit, but by that power which was from Christ. For when he sent them out, it is not said that "he gave them the Holy Spirit," but that "he gave them power": Matthew 10:1. But this seems contrary to what the Lord says in Luke 11:19: "if I cast out devils by Beelzebub, by whom do your children cast them out?" But it is certain that he cast out demons in the Holy Spirit, and the children, that is, the apostles, likewise; whence it is manifest that they had received the Holy Spirit. And therefore it must be said, according to Augustine, that before the resurrection the apostles had the Holy Spirit even as to the gifts of prophecy and of miracles. And this which is said, "as yet the Spirit was not given," must be understood of the abundant giving, and of visible signs, just as it was given to them after the resurrection and ascension in tongues of fire. But since the Holy Spirit sanctifies the Church, and is even now received by the faithful, why does no one speak in the tongues of all nations as then? To this it must be said that this is not necessary, as Augustine says. For already the universal Church speaks in the tongues of the nations, because through the Holy Spirit charity is given; Romans 5:5: "the charity of God is poured forth in our hearts," and this, making all things common, makes each one speak for each. Hence he says: "if you love unity, whatever anyone has in it" (that is, in the Church) "belongs to you also. Take away envy, and what I have is yours: envy separates, charity joins together: have charity, and you will have all things." In the beginning, however, before the Church had spread throughout the world, since there were few, it was fitting that they should speak in the tongues of all, so that in this way they might found the Church among all peoples.

Concerning the second, it must be known, according to Augustine, that this which Jesus says, "he had not yet been glorified," must be understood of the glory of the resurrection; as if he were to say: he had not yet risen from the dead, he had not yet ascended into the heavens. Of which it is said, John 17:5: "glorify me, Father." And the reason why he willed to be glorified first, before he gave the Holy Spirit, is assigned, because the Holy Spirit is given to us for this purpose, that he might raise up our hearts from the love of the world into a spiritual resurrection, and that they might run wholly into God. Because, then, he promised eternal life to those fervent with the charity of the Holy Spirit, where we shall not die, where we shall fear nothing — therefore he willed not to give the Holy Spirit himself except once he was glorified, so that in his body he might show forth the life which in the resurrection we hope for. According to Chrysostom, however, this is not understood of the glory of the resurrection, but of the glorification of the passion: of which, with the hour of the passion imminent, the Lord says below, chapter 13:31: "now is the Son of Man glorified." And according to this, the Holy Spirit was then first given when, after the passion, he said to the apostles: "receive the Holy Spirit," etc. Now the reason why the Holy Spirit was not given before the passion is that, since it is a gift, it ought not to have been given to enemies, but to friends. But we were enemies. It was necessary, therefore, that the victim first be offered on the altar of the cross, and the enmity dissolved in the flesh, so that thus, through the death of his Son, we might be reconciled to God, and then, made friends, we might receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, and so on.

Having thus set down Christ's invitation to spiritual drink, here the Evangelist consequently treats of the dissension of the crowds; and first is set down the dissension of the crowds among themselves; second, the dissension among the rulers, where it says "the ministers therefore came." Concerning the first he does two things. First are set down the diverse words of those who disagreed; second, the dissension itself is set down, where it says "so there arose a dissension among the people." Now the diversity of the words of the crowds arose from the diversity of the opinions of the crowds concerning Christ, and therefore he sets down three opinions of the crowds: two indeed of those already approaching the spiritual drink, but the third of those drawing back. Now the first opinion was that they said Christ was a prophet; and therefore he says "from that hour therefore," namely when, on the great day of the festivity, he had said such things, "the crowd, when they had heard these his words, said" — that is, those who had already begun to draw that water spiritually — "this is indeed the prophet." They call him not only a prophet, but even the true one, that is, as it were by antonomasia, understanding this to be he of whom Moses had foretold, Deuteronomy 18:15: "God will raise up to you a prophet from your brethren: him you shall hear as me." Another opinion was that certain said "this is the Christ"; for these were approaching the drink more closely, and had laid aside more of the dryness of unbelief. And this Peter also confessed, Matthew 16:16: "you are Christ the Son of the living God." The third opinion is of those who bring forward things contrary to the foregoing. And first they object against the opinion of those saying he is the Christ; second, they confirm the objection by an authority. He says, then, "but some," remaining in the dryness of their unbelief, said: "does the Christ then come out of Galilee?" For they knew that the prophets had not foretold that Christ would come from Galilee; and so, believing him to have been born in Nazareth (for they were ignorant that the place of his birth was Bethlehem), they say this. For it was manifest that he had been raised in Nazareth, but the place of his birth was known to few. Although, however, Scripture does not say that Christ would be born in Galilee, it did foretell that he would first turn aside there. Isaiah 9:1: "at the first time the land of Zabulon and the land of Nephthali was lightly touched: and afterwards it was more grievously afflicted by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, in Galilee of the Gentiles. The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: to them that dwelt in the region of the shadow of death, light is risen." He also foretold that he would come forth from Nazareth. Isaiah 11:1: "a flower shall rise up out of his root," where in the Hebrew it reads: "a Nazarene shall come from the root," and so on.

They confirm the objection by the authority of Scripture, when they say: "does not the Scripture say, that Christ comes from the seed of David, and from Bethlehem, the town where David was?" Now that Jesus was to come from the seed of David is said in Jeremiah 23:5: "I will raise up to David a just branch." And in 2 Kings 23:1 it is said of David: "the man to whom it was appointed concerning the Christ of God, said." And that he was to come from Bethlehem is said in Micah 5:1: "and you, Bethlehem, the land of Judah: out of you shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel."

Consequently, when he says "so there arose a dissension among the people because of him," first the dissension itself is set down; second, the effort of some of them against Christ; third, the repression of that effort. Now the dissension arose "because of him," namely Christ, "among the people." For it frequently happens that from the manifestation of truth, dissension and disturbance is caused in the hearts of the wicked. Hence this too is said in the person of Christ, Jeremiah 15:10: "woe is me, my mother: why have you borne me a man of strife, a man of contention to the whole earth?" On account of this the Lord said, Matthew 10:34: "I came not to send peace, but the sword." Now the effort, namely of some, was to seize him; hence he says "but some of them," namely those who had said "does the Christ then come out of Galilee?" etc., "would have apprehended him," namely out of enmity, to kill him; Psalm 70:2: "pursue and take him"; Exodus 15:9: "the enemy said: I will pursue and overtake." And yet the good and faithful also wish to apprehend Christ, so that they may enjoy him; Song of Songs 7:8: "I will go up into the palm tree, and will take hold of its fruits." Now the repression of their effort was from the power of Christ; and therefore he says "but no man laid hands upon him," because, namely, Christ did not will it. This was within his own power; below, chapter 10:18: "no man takes my life from me; but I lay it down of myself." Hence also, when he willed to suffer, he did not wait for them, but himself offered himself to them; below, chapter 18:4: "he went forth, and said to them, whom do you seek?"

Consequently, when he says "the ministers therefore came to the chief priests and the Pharisees," the dissension of the rulers is set down; and first is set down their dissension with the ministers; second, their dissension among themselves, where it says "Nicodemus said." Concerning the first he does three things. First is set down the rebuke of the rulers to the ministers; second, the testimony borne concerning Christ by the ministers; third, the effort of the rulers to reprehend the ministers. In the first, attend to the iniquity of the rulers, when they say, namely the chief priests and Pharisees, to the ministers, "why have you not brought him?" For they were so evil that the ministers could not satisfy them unless they inflicted harm on Christ; Proverbs 4:16: "sleep is taken away from their eyes, unless they have made someone fall." But here a question arises as to the letter of the text: because, whereas it was said above that the ministers were sent to seize Jesus in the midst of the feast day, that is, on the fourth day, and here their return is set down after the seventh day, when he said "but on the last day," etc., it seems that they were idle for the intervening days. To this there is a twofold answer. One, that the Evangelist anticipated the murmuring of the crowds. Or it may be said that perhaps they returned then, but this is now recalled in order to make manifest the cause of the dissension among the rulers.

In the second, attend to the goodness of the ministers in the commendable testimony which they gave concerning Christ, saying: "never did man speak like this man." Here they are rendered commendable on three counts. First, from the cause of their admiration: because they marveled at Christ not on account of miracles, but on account of his teaching, by which they are brought nearer to the truth, and depart from the custom of the Jews, who seek signs, as is said in 1 Corinthians 1:22. Second, from the ease of their conversion: because at a few words of Christ they were captivated, and drawn to love of him. Third, from the security of their soul: because to the Pharisees themselves, who were opposed to Christ, they say such things of Christ: "never did man speak like this man." And this reasonably: because he was not only a man, but also the Word of God; and therefore his words were powerful to move; Jeremiah 23:29: "are not my words as a fire, says the Lord, and as a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?" And so it is said in Matthew 7:29, that "he was teaching them as one having power." They were also savory, so as to give sweetness; Song of Songs 2:14: "let your voice sound in my ears, for your voice is sweet"; Psalm 118:103: "how sweet are your words to my palate." They were useful for retaining, because they promised eternal goods; above, John 6:69: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life"; Isaiah 48:17: "I am the Lord who teaches you profitable things."

In the third, attend to the detestable perfidy of the Jews, by which they strive to draw the ministers back from Christ; hence "they answered them," namely the ministers, "are you also seduced?" Here they do three things. First they argue that the ministers are supposedly in error; second, they set forth the example of the rulers; third, they exclude the example of the crowds. Now they argue against them when they say "are you also seduced?" As if to say: we see that you have taken delight in his discourse. And indeed they were laudably seduced, because, having let go the evil of unbelief, they were led to the truth of faith: of which it is said in Jeremiah 20:7: "you have seduced me, O Lord, and I am seduced." Now they set forth the example of the rulers, in order the more to turn them away; hence he says "has any one of the rulers believed in him?" For men are rendered worthy of credence from two things: namely, from authority and from religion. Hence they bring forward these two things against Christ, as if to say: if Christ were to be accepted, certainly the rulers, in whom there is authority, and the Pharisees, in whom religion was apparent, would have accepted him; but none of these has believed in him: therefore neither ought you to believe in him. In these, then, is fulfilled what is said in Psalm 117:22: "the stone which the builders rejected" — namely the rulers and the Pharisees — "the same is become the head of the corner," that is, in the hearts of the peoples. "But this has been done by the Lord": because his goodness outweighs the malice of men.

Now they exclude the testimony of the crowd, because they confute their malice; and therefore they say "but this crowd, that knows not the law, are accursed"; and therefore one is not to stand with them. Now this is written, Deuteronomy 27:26: "cursed is he who does not continue in the law, and does not fulfil it in deed." But this they understood wrongly, because even those who do not have knowledge of the law, and yet do the works of the law, remain in the law more than those who have knowledge of the law and do not keep it: of whom it is said in Matthew 15:8: "this people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me"; James 1:22: "be doers of the word, and not hearers only."

Consequently, when he says "Nicodemus said to them," the dissension of the rulers among themselves is set down; and first is set down Nicodemus's exhortation; second, the contradiction of the rulers, where it says "they answered, and said"; third, the termination of the dissension. Concerning the first he does two things. First he premises certain things about Nicodemus; second he sets down his exhortation. Now he premises three things about him: two of which show the intention of what is said, and the third, the wickedness of the rulers. The first, then, pertains to the faith of Nicodemus; hence he says "he who had come to him said" — that is, who had believed: for to come to Christ and to believe in him are the same thing. The second pertains to the imperfection of his faith, because "he came by night." For if he had believed perfectly, he would not have been afraid. Below, chapter 12:42: "many of the rulers believed in him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, that they might not be cast out of the synagogue" — of whom Nicodemus was one. The third pertains to the falsity of the rulers. For they had said that none of the rulers and Pharisees had believed in Christ, and therefore he says "who was one of them," as if to say: if Nicodemus, who is one of the rulers, believed in him, it is manifest that what the rulers and Pharisees say is false, namely, that none of the rulers believed in him. Jeremiah 16:19: "truly he has spoken a lie."

Now Nicodemus's exhortation is set down when he says: "does our law judge any man, unless it first hear him, and know what he does?" For according to civil laws a diligent inquiry ought to precede a sentence. Hence it is said in Acts 25:16: "it is not the custom of the Romans to condemn any man, before he who is accused has his accusers present, and has liberty to make his answer, to clear himself of the things laid to his charge." Hence Job 29:16: "the cause which I knew not, I searched out diligently." On this account it is said in the law of Moses, Exodus 23:7: "you shall not condemn the innocent and the just: for I abhor the wicked." Now he says these words for this reason, that, since he was a believer, he wished to convert them to Christ. Yet because he was timid, he did this covertly. For he believed that, if only they would consent to hear Christ, the word of Christ was of such efficacy that perhaps they too would become like those who had been sent to Jesus, and who, converted by his words, ended up doing the very thing for which they had been sent.

The contradiction of the rulers is set down when he says "they answered, and said to him," etc. Here first they charge him as being, as it were, seduced; second, as ignorant of the law. As to the first they say "are you also a Galilean?" — that is, seduced by a Galilean. For they reckoned Christ to be a Galilean from his manner of life in Galilee; and therefore all who confessed Christ they call Galileans, as it were in reproach; Matthew 26:69: "the maidservant answered Peter: you also are a Galilean." Below, chapter 9:27: "will you also become his disciples?" As to the second they say "search the Scriptures, and see, that out of Galilee a prophet does not arise" — although he was a teacher of the law, and had no need to search anew. As if to say: although you are a teacher, yet you are ignorant of this — just as was said above, chapter 3:10: "are you a master in Israel, and know not these things?" Although, however, it is not had expressly in the Scripture of the Old Testament that a prophet should arise from Galilee, this nevertheless is had, that from there the Lord of the prophets should come forth, according to that of Isaiah 11:1: "a flower" — that is, a Nazarene — "shall rise up out of his root, and the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him."

But the termination of the dissension is shown to be fruitless; hence he says "and every man returned," as if the business were unfinished, "to his own house" — that is, to their own affairs — empty of faith, and cheated of their evil desire. Job 5:13: "he brings to nought the counsel of the wicked"; Psalm 32:10: "the Lord rejects the counsels of princes, and scatters the thoughts of the peoples." Or, "to his own house," that is, into the malice of his unbelief and impiety; Apocalypse 2:13: "I know where you dwell, where the seat of Satan is: and you hold fast my name, and have not denied my faith."