Commentary on Hebrews (Super Epistolam ad Hebraeos Lectura)

Above, the Apostle showed the dignity of the new testament with respect to the old in general; here he shows the same thing in particular, descending to the individual things that were in each testament. And concerning this he does two things. First he compares the things of the old testament with those of the new, so as to show upon this the dignity of the new; second he makes manifest certain things which he had presupposed, in chapter 10, where he says, "for it has a shadow." Concerning the first he does three things: first he sets forth that which was in the old testament; second he shows its significance, where he says, "the Spirit signifying this"; third, from these he argues to his purpose, where he says, "and therefore of the new testament." Again, the first is divided into two. First he describes the condition of the old testament; second he continues, where he says, "for a tabernacle was made."

Concerning the first, it must be known that both the old and the new testament were instituted for this, that through them the soul might draw near to God. But for this two things are necessary, namely withdrawal from sin, and union with God. The first comes about through justification; the second through sanctification, and in each testament there is justification and sanctification. Hence he says: thus it has been said, that the former grew old. But of what sort was that former one? Such that it indeed also had, previously, ordinances of worship — namely, of latria, according to the Greek. For in the old there were certain washings by which they were cleansed, not indeed from the stain of sin, but from certain irregularities by which they were impeded from the worship of God — as, from the touch of a dead body or of something unclean, they could not enter the tabernacle unless expiated through certain washings. And therefore they were called ordinances of worship, because through them one was made fit for divine worship. And of this it is had in Leviticus, chapter 22. Jerome: ordinances, that is, washings, by which, once purified, it was lawful to approach.

But their sanctification was — "and a worldly sanctuary." "World" is sometimes taken for any duration whatsoever. Ps. 110, 3: unto the world of the world. Sometimes it signifies this world. 2 Tim. 4, 9: Demas has forsaken me, loving this world. That sanctification, therefore, can be called worldly, because it was temporal, and not perpetual. But the Greek text does not take it this way, for it says "mundane sanctuary." Hence there is a difference between the new testament and the old, because although each is corporeal, yet the new contains grace, and is sacred, in which, under the covering of visible things, divine power works salvation more secretly — which was not the case in the old testament, since in itself it contained no grace. Gal. 4, 9: how do you turn again to the weak and needy elements?

Then, when he says "tabernacle," etc., he expounds what he had said. And first as to the disposition of the tabernacle; second as to the ministry of the priests, where he says, "now these things being thus," etc. Concerning the first, for the understanding of the letter, it must be known that the Lord commanded, in the desert, that a tabernacle be made, which should have thirty cubits or paces in length, and ten in breadth, in such a way that the door was toward the east, before which hung a veil upon four columns, and a certain tent, in which was the altar of holocausts. But of this nothing is to the purpose, since the Apostle makes no mention of it; but in the tabernacle, toward the west, over a space of ten cubits in length and ten in breadth, a veil was hung upon four columns; and this divided one part of ten cubits from the other of twenty cubits. Now the part of twenty cubits is called the holy place, and the first tabernacle; but that of ten cubits is called the holy of holies and the second tabernacle.

This distinction can be explained in two ways. In one way, because the things that were in the old testament were a figure of the new testament. The new is also a figure of the heavenly homeland. So, then, by the first tabernacle is signified the old testament, and by the second, the new. In another way, by the first tabernacle is signified the present Church; by the second, the heavenly glory. Insofar, then, as it signifies the old testament, it is a figure of a figure; but insofar as it signifies the present Church, which still signifies the future glory, it is a figure of the truth, as to each.

Concerning this, then, he does two things: first he describes that which was in the first; second, that which was in the second, where he says, "after the veil." But in the first there were three things, namely the golden candlestick toward the south, which was made in this way. For from one long shaft proceeded six branches, as it were six arms, namely three on the right and three on the left. And thus at the top there were seven branches, and on each was one lamp, which burned. Likewise in each branch there were four things, namely the branch itself, which was made of three parts as it were three pieces, namely cups, knops, and lilies — because there two parts were joined. At the end of each part there was, as it were, a certain cup, in which two cups were joined after the manner of a nut, and two round knops, and two, as it were, lily leaves, on this side and that.

Likewise in the northern part there was a golden table in the manner of an altar, upon which, on the sabbath, twelve warm loaves were placed, and upon each, bright incense in a golden dish. And those loaves, which were called of proposition, stood until the day of the sabbath, when they had to be removed, and others were put back in their place. Likewise in the middle there was a golden altar for burning incense of good odor, and this, according to the letter, lest the house should stink on account of the multitude of sacrificial blood. Now by the candlestick, which gives light, and by the table, it is designated according to the letter, that he who serves the altar should live from the altar.

He says, then, "the former tabernacle" — that is, the front part of the tabernacle — "was made," in which were the candlesticks, which were one as to substance but many as to branches, and this toward the south; and the table toward the north, and "the proposition of loaves," that is, the loaves of proposition, by hypallage, just as "the pipe blew through the cheeks"; and this part is called holy. Of this it is treated diffusely in Exodus 25, 26, and 27.

Then, when he says "after the veil," etc., he describes the things that were in the second tabernacle, namely the ark of the testament, made of imperishable setim wood, covered round about on every side, that is, both within and without, with gold. But in the ark there were three things: namely, a golden urn having manna, and this in memory of that benefit bestowed on them, Ex. 16, 32ff.; and the rod of Aaron that had blossomed, Num. 17, v. 8, in memory of Aaron's priesthood, lest any other stranger should presume to approach; and the tablets of the testament, Ex. 25, 21, in memory of the law.

Likewise above the ark were two Cherubim, who touched each other with two wings, and touched the sides of the tabernacle with two wings. But between the two wings with which they touched each other, there was a golden tablet of the same length and breadth as the ark, namely two cubits in length, a cubit and a half in breadth, and it was set above, and it was called the mercy-seat. Hence it was, as it were, a seat, from which God would hearken so as to be reconciled to the people. Ps. 79, 2: who sittest upon the Cherubim, etc. But the ark was, as it were, a footstool. Those two Cherubim, with faces turned toward each other, looked upon the mercy-seat.

But here the Apostle adds a fourth thing, namely the golden censer, concerning which some say that it was the altar between the holy places, as has been said. Into the holy place, which was the outer one, the priests entered every day for the completion of the mysteries; but into the holy of holies the high priest entered once a year with blood, and then he would fill that censer with incense, so that from the smoke a cloud would rise, which would cover the holy of holies, lest it should be seen by those who were outside.

These, then, are the things that were after the veil, which was the second tabernacle, which is called holy of holies for its dignity, just as one says "virgin of virgins" by antonomasia — having the golden censer, and the ark, in which was the urn, etc.; above which, namely the ark — not that they had feet above it, but only wings — the Cherubim of glory, that is, gloriously made, overshadowing the mercy-seat, namely with their wings, of which it is not now the time to speak, that is, to go on, in detail.

But on the contrary, because in 3 Kings 8, 9 it is said that in the ark there was nothing else but the two tablets. I answer. It must be said that this is true as to the principal intention, because the ark was principally made for this, as is clear from Ex. 25.

But as to what these things signify, it must be known that all the ceremonies of the law were ordered to a use, according to that state; but to another end insofar as they were figurative, that is, as they represented Christ. As to the first, all were instituted to represent the magnificence of God. But that was not represented except in its effects. Now these effects have, as it were, a twofold world: one higher, namely that of incorporeal substances, and this is represented by the holy of holies. The other is that of this lower, sensible world, and this is represented by the holy place.

But in the higher world there are three things, namely God, the natures of things, and the Angels. But God is altogether incomprehensible, and therefore there was a seat without one sitting, because he cannot be comprehended by a creature except from his effects. But that seat was the mercy-seat, as has been said. But the Angels are signified by the Cherubim on account of wisdom. Hence also the philosophers call the Angels intellectual substances. There were two, to designate that they were not placed there to be worshipped, since it had been said to them, Deut. c. 4: hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one. That they look upon the mercy-seat designates that they do not withdraw from the contemplation of God. Matt. 18, 10: their Angels in heaven always see the face of the Father, etc. The natures of things are signified by the ark. But those things that are in this world either pertain to wisdom, which is signified by the tablets, or to power, which is signified by the rod, or to goodness, which is signified by the manna, which was sweet, because whatever sweetness there is in a creature is wholly from the goodness of God. But because the natures of things, which are intelligibly in God, are sensibly in bodily creatures, therefore as in the tablets there was intellectual light, so in the holy place there was bodily light. There, manna; here, loaves; there, the rod; here, the altar, which pertains to the office of the priest.

But insofar as Christ was figured through these things, all these are found in him. And first as to the holy place. For he himself is the candlestick of light. John 8, 12: I am the light of the world. In this there are six ranks: three on the left, namely the perfect of the old testament, and three on the right, namely of the new testament. These are designated, Ezek. 14, 14: by Noah, the prelates; by Daniel, the contemplatives; by Job, the active. These branches receive the light, and it is poured into them, because, as it is said, 1 Pet. 4, 10: as every man hath received grace, ministering the same one to another. The cups are those offering the drink of wisdom. The knops, on account of the readiness of obedience. The lilies, on account of the end of eternal life. The seven lamps are the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Likewise Christ is the table of refreshment. The twelve loaves are the teaching of the twelve apostles and their successors, which are set forth on the sabbath of hope until the sabbath of hope, even if meanwhile one is removed by death, another is substituted. But on the great sabbath all will be removed. In the lower part was the mercy-seat, and Christ is the propitiation for our sins, 1 John 2, v. 2.

The two Angels are the two testaments looking upon Christ in concord. Or, all the Angels serving Christ in concord and with one mind. Matt. 4, 11: Angels came and ministered to him. Dan. 7, 10: thousands of thousands ministered to him. Above, 1, 14: all are ministering spirits. They desire to look upon Christ, 1 Pet. 1, 12. Likewise they overshadow the mercy-seat, that is, they guard the Church of Christ. Or, because by their ministry visions and apparitions came about, in which Christ was figured in a shadowy way.

The gilded ark of setim wood is the pure and most precious flesh of Christ, which is also called the golden urn on account of wisdom, full of the sweetness of divinity. The tablets are his wisdom; the rod is his eternal priesthood; or the rod is the power of Christ; the manna, the sweetness of grace, which is given through the priesthood of Christ, or through obedience to the commandments, as a man obeys power. But because no one has grace in such a way that he does not sin, except Christ and his mother, therefore it is necessary to have a mercy-seat.

But it must be known that the Gloss expounds these things very diffusely upon this passage.

Above, the Apostle described those things which pertain to the old testament as regards the arrangement of the tabernacle; here he goes on to treat of the office of the ministers. And first, of those things which pertain to the holy place; second, of those things which pertain to the holy of holies, at "but into the second."

Now for the understanding of this text, it must be known that, as was said above, in the front part of the tabernacle itself, about the middle, there was the altar of thymiamatis, or of incense — which is the same thing — and the candlestick. And on the south side, and opposite it, the table of proposition.

The priest, therefore, on each day, morning and evening, entered the holy place for two reasons: namely, to prepare the lamps, and to burn incense, so that light and a good odor might continually be in the holy place. He says, therefore: these things, namely, which pertain to the appearance of the tabernacle, being thus arranged — that is, set in order — always, that is, daily, namely morning and evening, the priests entered, accomplishing the offices of the sacrifices; not that they sacrificed within the holy place, since they sacrificed upon the altar of holocausts, which was before the doors of the tabernacle under the open sky, but he calls the burning of the incense and the devotion of those offering it a sacrifice.

Then, when he says but into the second, he sets down the office of the ministers as regards the holy of holies. Concerning which it must be known that, as is said in Lev. 16:2ff., the high priest, on the day of expiation (which took place on the tenth day of the seventh month, namely of September, which is the seventh from our March, and which among the Hebrews coincides in part with April, in which the years begin, Ex. 12:2: this month shall be to you the beginning of months; it shall be the first in the months of the year — for they begin the month at the new moon, which always begins in March, unless an embolism impedes it) — offered for himself and his whole house a calf, and a goat for the sin of the people, and, these having been immolated, he took of their blood, and filled the censer with the coals of the altar of holocausts, which was in the court before the doors of the tabernacle, and with all these he entered into the holy of holies, and with the blood he made expiation for the tabernacle, sprinkling the blood against the veil, and afterward he went out. And with the same blood he anointed the horns of the altar of incense: and this he did once in the year.

Hence he says, but into the second — namely, the tabernacle which is called the holy of holies — the high priest alone entered once in the year. The Gloss says that he could enter several times without blood, but not with blood, except once. Of this, however, it is understood only for when the camp was to be moved, for then Aaron and his sons entered, and wrapped up and distributed the burdens of the Levites, as is clear in Num. 4:5ff.: yet once in the year the high priest alone entered with blood, when he offered for his own and the people's ignorance, that is, for our sins. Prov. 14:22: they err who work evil. For every evil man is ignorant, as is held in III Ethics. Of this it is treated in Lev. ch. 16, where this rite is handed down.

Mystically, however, by the first tabernacle is designated the present Church, in which the faithful ought to sacrifice themselves. Rom. 12:1: present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing to God. Ps. 50:18: a sacrifice to God is a contrite spirit. Likewise, they ought to sacrifice their goods in alms. Below, 13:16: for by such sacrifices God is merited. But into the holy of holies, that is, into the heavenly homeland, the high priest alone enters, namely Christ, in soul and body.

Yet according to the letter, the intention of the Apostle is that by the holy place is understood the old law; by the holy of holies, the state of the new testament and heaven, because through the new law one enters into heaven. And therefore he adds, the Holy Spirit signifying this, where he explains what is signified by this: first as regards the old testament; second as regards the new, at Christ standing by. Likewise, in the first part, first he sets down the office of the ministers as regards the first tabernacle; second he adds the reason of its arrangement, at according to which gifts.

But it must be known that in the first, the priests entered daily, but in the second, which was beyond the veil, only the high priest alone entered, once in the year. Hence as regards those ministers there were two things there: one, that in the first they entered daily; the other, that before the second there was a veil for them. Hence the interposition of the veil signifies that heavenly things were veiled to them. Likewise, that they did not enter, signifies that the old testament is not the way of entering heaven before the coming of Christ.

He says, therefore: I say that this was thus accomplished, the Holy Spirit signifying this. II Pet. ch. 1:21: prophecy was not at any time brought by the will of man, but holy men of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, spoke. And this is against the heretics, who say that the old testament is not from the Holy Spirit, but from an evil God.

Signifying what? That the way of the saints had not yet been made manifest, while the former tabernacle — that is, the old testament signified by the first tabernacle — still had standing. For while the old testament endured, the way of the saints, namely Christ, who says, Jn. 14:6: I am the way, had not yet come; for he himself is the door through which the entrance into the holy of holies lies open. Jn. 10:7: I am the door. But he was not made manifest, because he still lay hidden, shadowed under the figures of the letter. Below, 10:1: the law having a shadow of the things to come, et cetera. Which parable is of instans time, that is, of the present time; or instans, that is, leading us to those things which happen in the present time.

Then, when he says according to which, he sets down the reason why, during the state of the old law, entrance into the holy of holies did not lie open. For into that holy place no one enters except one who is perfect. Is. 35:8: it shall be called the holy way; the polluted shall not pass through it. And therefore there was no cleansing and perfection there, nor was there entrance into it. But the old testament could not make the one serving perfect, because the sacrifice satisfying for the sin of the whole human race had not yet been offered.

And therefore he says according to which — namely, either the parable or the figure — gifts and sacrifices are offered. This refers back to what he said, accomplishing the offices of the sacrifices, because oblations and gifts are of all things; but sacrifices, which are only of animals, were not offered in the holy of holies, but in the holy place or at the doors of the tabernacle. But these could not cleanse, because they cannot make the one serving perfect, with the service of latria, which pertains to divine worship.

Perfect, I say, as regards conscience. For there is a twofold cleansing. One from the stain and guilt of sin. And as regards conscience, the law cannot do this. Below, 10:4: it is impossible that sins be taken away by the blood of bulls and goats. Is. 1:13: offer sacrifice no more in vain. Mich. 6:7: can God be appeased with thousands of rams, or with thousands of fat goats? The other cleansing was as regards worship, namely, that it might be lawful for them to minister in those sacrifices: and in this way it did cleanse.

But were there many perfect ones under the old law? And it seems that there were. For it was said to Abraham, Gen. 17:1: walk before me, and be perfect. Moses also, and many others, were very holy and perfect. I respond. It must be said that, although at that time many were perfect and holy, this nevertheless was not from the works of the law. Above, 7:19: the law brought nothing to perfection. But this was through faith in Christ. Gen. 15:6: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice. This, therefore, was not by the power of the ceremonies or of the legal observances. Hence it is frequently said there, the priest shall pray for him, and it shall be forgiven him, Lev. 5:10, and in many other places. That it cleansed, therefore, was from faith.

But in the new testament it is said, Mark, last chapter: he who believes and is baptized shall be saved. For without the sacraments of the new law there is no salvation. Jn. 3:5: unless one be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, et cetera.

But why did they not cleanse the conscience? Because they consisted in foods and drinks, but sin is in the conscience. But that which is purely corporeal does not cleanse the soul, because it does not act upon the soul. But in those sacrifices there were foods and drinks, etc., which pertain to the body, and therefore they could not cleanse the conscience. He says, therefore, in foods and drinks, that is, in the distinguishing of foods and drinks forbidden in the old law, because to abstain from these does not cleanse the conscience. Or so that this may be referred to the use of the sacrifices, because those things which were offered for sins were eaten by the priests, and other things by others. For these did not cleanse the conscience. Jer. 11:15: shall the holy flesh take away from you your wickedness?

And with divers baptisms, that is, washings, because, as is said in Mk. 7:3f., the Jews kept the baptisms of cups and pitchers, and, returning from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they be washed. Against whom the Lord says, Matt. 23:25: woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, who cleanse that which is outside the cup and the dish, but within you are full of rapine and uncleanness. Nevertheless the Apostle is not speaking here of the superstitions of the Pharisees, and therefore one must have recourse to the other washings prescribed in the law, such as the water in which the priests washed, and the water of purification in the cleansing of the leper or the polluted. Hence it is frequently said, they shall wash their garments, et cetera. And these are here called baptisms.

And in the justices of the flesh: to this he adds universally concerning all things. He calls these ceremonial things the justices of the flesh, that is, carnal, because they pertained only to bodily cleanliness, nor was there in them any spiritual power. And lest someone should say: why then were they instituted, if they could not bring to perfection? For it would then seem that God instituted them uselessly. He removes this when he says, imposed until the time of correction, as if he were to say: this would be true, that they had been instituted uselessly, if they were always to endure. But just as a boy must first be given a tutor, but when he has already come to a perfect age, then a manner of conducting himself is given to him according to the judgment of the ruler of the republic: so in the old law those things which pertain to imperfection were instituted, but when the perfect time came, then those things which lead to perfection had to be instituted. And therefore he says until the time of correction, that is, in which it should be corrected, not indeed as evil things, but as imperfect things. For the law is good, Rom. 7:12. Ps. 89:10: mildness has come upon us, and we shall be corrected.

Above, the Apostle set down the signification of those things which pertain to the old testament and the first tabernacle; here he sets down the conditions of those things which pertain to the second tabernacle, which represented the new testament. And concerning this he does two things. For first he sets down that signification; second he proves a certain thing which he had assumed, at the place, For if the blood of goats.

Now it must be known that if the things said above are considered, five things have been said about the second tabernacle: namely, who entered, since only the high priest; second, the dignity and condition of the place into which he entered, since it was called the holy of holies; third, how he entered, since with blood; fourth, when he entered, since once a year; fifth, why he entered, since for the expiation of sins. Here, however, the Apostle explains those five.

And first, who he is who enters, namely Christ. For the high priest is the prince of priests. But such is Christ. 1 Pet. 5, 4: When the prince of pastors shall appear, etc. Above, 4, 14: Having therefore a great high priest who has penetrated the heavens, Jesus, etc. But any high priest whatever is the dispenser of some testament. Now in any testament whatever two things are to be considered: namely, the end promised in that testament, and the things that are handed down in it. But the goods promised in the old testament were temporal goods. Is. ch. 1, 19: If you be willing and hear me, you shall eat the good things of the land. That high priest, therefore, was of temporal goods. But Christ is the high priest of heavenly goods. Matt. 5, 12: Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is abundant in heaven. He is therefore the high priest of good things to come, because through his high priesthood we are led into the goods to come. Ps. 64, 5: We shall be filled with the good things of your house. Likewise, in the old, figural things were dispensed; but Christ dispenses spiritual things, which were figured through those. Lk. 11, 13: Your Father from heaven will give the good spirit to those who ask him. Thus, therefore, by the good things to come can be understood either the heavenly goods — and this with respect to the new testament — or the spiritual goods with respect to the old, of which they were the figure.

This high priest is not negligent, but assisting. For the high priest is a mediator between God and the people: but Christ is a mediator: 1 Tim. 2, 5: The mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Deut. 5, 5: I was the mediator and go-between between the Lord and you. And therefore he himself assists the Father to intercede for us, above 7, 25; Rom. 8, 34: Christ Jesus, who also intercedes for us. Likewise assisting us to help. Ps. 15, 8: He is at my right hand, that I be not moved. Acts 7, 55: Behold, I see the heavens opened, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. Thus, therefore, it is clear who entered.

Second he shows the dignity of the inner tabernacle, since he says "through the more ample," and the condition, since he also says "more perfect," inasmuch as it is unmovable. Is. 33, 20: Your eyes shall see the tabernacle that can nowise be removed any further. But this is the tabernacle of heavenly glory. Ps. 14, 1: Lord, who shall dwell in your tabernacle? But it is called a tabernacle, because it is the place of pilgrims. For it is not owed to us from the condition of nature, but only through grace. Is. 32, v. 18: My people shall sit in the beauty of peace, in tabernacles of confidence, in wealthy rest. It is therefore very ample on account of the immense multitude of goods, which is designated in the aforesaid authority: "he shall sit," etc. Bar. ch. 3, 24: O Israel, how great is the house of God.

Now that which is said, "through the more ample," is read in two ways: in one way, that it is one word, as if "very ample," and thus the letter is construed: Christ, the assisting high priest of the goods to come, entered into the holy of holies — I say, which are the very ample tabernacle. In another way, that the word "through" is a preposition, which is expressed more in the Greek, and then it is construed thus: Christ entered into the holy things through a more ample tabernacle, that is, more ample and perfect. Likewise "more perfect," because there every imperfection will cease. 1 Cor. 13, 10: When that which is perfect shall come, that which is in part shall be done away. Likewise it is of another condition, because that one was made by the hand of man, but this one not — but by the hand of God. Ex. 15, 17: Your sanctuary, Lord, which your hands have founded, etc. 2 Cor. 5, 1: For we know that if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, but eternal in the heavens. Below, 11, 10: For he looked for a city having foundations, whose builder and maker is God. And therefore he says "not made with hands," that is, not of this creation — because it is not made with hands, as the old was; nor is it of this creation, that is, among created sensible goods, but it is among spiritual goods.

Or by the tabernacle can be understood the body of Christ, in which he fought against the Devil. Ps. 18, 5: In the sun he has set his tabernacle. Which is very ample, because in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, Col. 2, 9. Likewise it is more perfect, because we have seen his glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth, Jn. 1, 14. Likewise not made with hands, because not from virile seed. Dan. 2, 45: A stone was cut out of the mountain without hands.

Third he shows how he entered, that not without blood, but that one with the blood of calves and goats, as is said Lev. 16; but Christ not thus, namely with another's blood. Therefore he says: neither through the blood of goats or calves, but through his own blood, which he immolated on the cross for our salvation. Matt. ch. 26, 28: This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins. But he says in the plural, "of calves and goats," not because there were several at once, but because through different years he entered many times. But Christ is signified by the goat on account of the likeness of sinful flesh, Rom. 8, 3. Likewise by the calf on account of strength, and because he makes use of the two testaments as of two horns. Hab. 3, 4: Horns in his hands.

Fourth, when he entered, that once a year: but Christ through the whole time, which is as it were a year. He entered once into the holy things, and once also shed his blood. 1 Pet. 3, 18: Christ died once for our sins. Rom. 6, 10: For in that he died to sin, he died once. Likewise he entered once, for from the time he entered the heavenly things, he is always there. And therefore he says that he entered once into the holy things.

Fifth he shows why he entered, that it was to offer for the ignorance of the people, not for his own, because he had none. For the blood of Christ avails more than that other for this, because through it eternal redemption was found; as if he were to say: through this blood we have been redeemed, and this forever, because its power is infinite. Below, 10, 14: By one oblation he has perfected forever them that are sanctified. Ps. 110, 8: The Lord has sent redemption to his people. Now this, that he says "found," can be referred to two things: namely, to the desire of God, which he had concerning our salvation. Job 33, v. 24: I have found wherein I may be merciful to him. Ez. 18, v. 32: I will not the death of the sinner. Likewise to the desire of the fathers, by which they desired to be redeemed. But no one found a way so fitting as Christ. And therefore he pointedly says "found."

Then, when he says, For if the blood, etc., he proves one thing which he had assumed, namely this last: eternal redemption having been found; as if he were to say: thus I have said, that through his own blood he made an eternal redemption, in which his greatest efficacy appears. But that it is so I prove through the topic from the lesser, because if the blood of brute animals accomplished what is less, the blood of Christ will be able to accomplish what is more. Whence concerning this he does two things. For first he sets down the antecedent; second the consequent, at the place, How much more the blood of Christ?

Concerning the first it must be known that in the old law there was a twofold cleansing. One which was done on the day of expiation, concerning which it is found Lev. 16, 29; and of this it has already been spoken, and this one seemed to be ordered directly to the cleansing from sin. The other was against irregularity of the law, concerning which it is said Num. 19, 2 ff., that the Lord commanded that Eleazar should receive from Moses a red cow without blemish, of full age, which had not drawn the yoke, and, led outside the camp, should immolate it in the sight of the people, and dip his finger in its blood, and sprinkle seven times toward the tabernacle, and that he should burn the whole of it — namely the flesh, the hide, and even its dung — with hyssop, cedar wood, and scarlet twice-dyed; which done, a clean man gathered the ashes, and poured them out in a clean place outside the camp. And of these some were put into water, with which the unclean man — namely, one who had touched the corpse of a dead man — was sprinkled on the third day and the seventh with hyssop, and thus he was cleansed, nor could he be cleansed otherwise.

This is the sense of the Apostle. And so, as to the first he says, For if the blood of goats or of bulls. But as to the second he says, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled sanctify the defiled — not by conferring grace, but unto the cleansing of the flesh, that is, from irregularity, because they were carnally impeded, as unclean, from divine worship; yet they did not take away sins. But only, as Augustine says, sometimes by the power of that sprinkling they were cleansed from bodily leprosy. And therefore he says, unto the cleansing of the flesh.

Then, when he says, How much more, etc., he sets down the consequent; as if he were to say: if blood and ashes can do this, what will the blood of Christ be able to do? Certainly much more. And the Apostle sets down three things, which show the efficacy of the blood of Christ.

First, who he is whose that blood is, namely, who is Christ. From which it is clear that his blood cleanses. Matt. 1, 21: For he shall save his people from their sins.

Second, the cause why Christ shed his blood — because this was the Holy Spirit, by whose motion and instinct, namely by the charity of God and of neighbor, he did this. Is. 59, 19: When he shall come as a violent river, which the spirit of the Lord drives. But the Spirit cleanses. Is. 4, 4: If the Lord shall wash away the filth of the daughters of Sion, and shall wash away the blood of Jerusalem out of the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning. And therefore he says, through the Holy Spirit he offered himself. Eph. 5, 2: Christ loved us, and delivered himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God, for an odor of sweetness.

Third, his condition, namely that he is spotless. Ex. 12, 5: The lamb shall be without blemish, a male of one year. Ecclus. 34, 4: Who shall be cleansed by the unclean? But can an unclean priest cleanse? I answer. It must be said that he cannot, if he acted by his own power; but he acts by the power of the blood of Christ, which is as the first cause. And therefore he would not have acted, unless he had been spotless.

It must be known, however, that the blood of those animals cleansed only from an exterior blemish, namely from contact with the dead; but the blood of Christ cleanses the conscience within, which comes about through faith, Acts 15, 9: purifying their hearts by faith — inasmuch, namely, as it makes one believe that all who cleave to Christ are cleansed through his blood. Therefore this one cleanses the conscience. Likewise that one cleansed from contact with the dead, but this one from dead works, namely sins, which take God away from the soul, whose life is through the union of charity. Likewise that one cleansed so that they could approach the figural ministry, but the blood of Christ unto the spiritual service of God. Ps. 100, 6: He who walked in the spotless way, this one ministered to me. And therefore he says, to serve God. Likewise God is life. Jn. 14, 6: I am the life. And Deut. 32, 40: I live forever. It is fitting, therefore, that he who serves him be living. Therefore he says, "they will live." And according to the ruler or judge of the people, so also his ministers, as it is said Ecclus. 10, 2. He, therefore, who wishes to serve God worthily ought to be living, just as he himself also is.

The Gloss expounds this whole figure diligently, and it is Augustine's, from the Questions on Numbers.

Above, the Apostle expounded those things which were done in the old testament, and opened up their mystical exposition; here, from these things, he argues to his intended point, namely that the new testament is preferred over the old, because it can do what the old could not. And concerning this he does two things. For first he sets forth the conclusion he intends; second he proves something he had presupposed, at the place, For where a testament. Again the first is divided into two. For first he concludes from what has been said that Christ is the mediator; second he shows this — that the old testament could not do this — at the place, which were under the former.

He says therefore: and therefore, namely because Christ entered into the holies, having found an eternal redemption, that is, leading unto eternal things, which the old could not do; hence it is necessary that this testament be other than that one, as the new is from the old. Ier. XXXI, 31: I will strike with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, et cetera. Apoc. XXI, v. 5: behold, I make all things new. Therefore Christ is the mediator of this new testament between God and man. I Tim. II, 5: the mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Now in every testament there is something which is promised, and something by which the testament is confirmed. But in the new testament heavenly and spiritual things are promised. Likewise this promise was confirmed by the death of Christ. And therefore Christ is the mediator of the new testament, that they who are called may receive the promise of eternal beatitude and of the eternal inheritance. And he says called, because this gift is not from works, but from the calling of God. Rom. VIII, 30: and whom he predestined, these he also called. I Thess. II, 12: we testified, that you should walk worthily of God, who has called you unto his kingdom and glory. Hence he says of the eternal inheritance, that is, of the eternal glory, which is our inheritance. I Pet. I, 3 s.: he has regenerated us unto a living hope, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, unto an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and unfading, reserved in the heavens. Ps. CXXVI, 4: behold the inheritance of the Lord. Likewise: the Lord is the portion of my inheritance. Now we have this inheritance through the death of Christ. Hence he says, a death coming between. I Pet. III, 9: unto this you were called, that you might possess a blessing by inheritance. The effect of this death is redemption from the transgression of sin. I Petr. I, 18 s.: you were redeemed from your vain manner of life, not with corruptible things, gold or silver, but with the precious blood of an unspotted lamb.

But could this redemption from sins have been effected in the old testament? And he answers that it could not, because those transgressions were under the former testament; as if to say: because they could not be removed by the power of the sacraments of the former testament. Rom. III, 9: we have charged that Jews and Greeks are all under sin. But against this, because David and many other saints had remission of sins. I respond. It must be said that as to this effect, which is entrance into heaven, no, because through the death of Christ the door of life was opened. For no one entered before the death of Christ. Zach. IX, 11: but you, by the blood of your testament, have sent forth your prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water. But as to the stain, in this way they did obtain it; yet not by the power of the sacraments of the old law, but in the faith of Christ. Thus therefore the new testament is more excellent than the old, because it is confirmed by the death of Christ, by which sins are remitted, and because it exhibits the promise.

Then, when he says, For where a testament, he proves what he had presupposed, namely that the new testament is confirmed through the death of Christ. And first he proves this by the authority of human law; second by the authority of divine law, at the place, Whence neither was the first. He says therefore: it has been said that the new testament is confirmed through the intervening death of Christ, because in order for a testament to be valid, it is necessary that the death of the testator intervene; and therefore the new testament would not have force, unless the death of Christ had intervened. Hence it is said, Io. XI, 50: it is expedient for you, that one man die for the people. Now the death of the testator is necessary for two things. First, that the testament may have firmness, because since it is an expression of the last will, it can always be changed before death. Hence he says, that a testament is confirmed in the dead, that is, through death. And in this way the new testament is confirmed through the death of Christ. Matth. XXVI, 28: this is my blood of the new testament, namely its confirmer and dedicator. Second, the death of the testator is necessary in order that the testament be valid and have efficacy. Hence he says, otherwise it is not yet valid, because no one can claim anything, nor even can the heirs claim the inheritance by force of the testament, except after the death of the testator. Therefore Christ willed to interpose his death for us.

Then, when he says, Whence neither was the first, he proves this same thing by the authority of divine law, namely by that which is found in the old testament. And concerning this he does two things. For first he shows the agreement between the two testaments; second he shows the difference, at the place, It is necessary therefore. Concerning the first he does two things, for first he proposes; second he makes it manifest, at the place, For when...had been read. He says therefore: thus it has been said, that in order for a testament to be valid, it is necessary that the death of the testator intervene. Nor should this seem surprising, because not even the first testament was dedicated, that is, confirmed, without blood. But that blood prefigured the blood of Christ. For all these things happened to them in figure, I Cor. X, 11.

Then, when he says, For...having been read, he proves the point proposed, namely that that testament was not confirmed without blood. And he proves this with respect to three things, in which there was a use of blood. First with respect to the promulgation of the law; second with respect to the consecration of the tabernacle, at the place, the tabernacle also; third with respect to the purification of the vessels, at the place, and almost all things in blood. Concerning the first it must be known that the Apostle here touches on the history which is found in Ex. XXIV, 7, where it is said, that after Moses had read before the people the commandments of the Lord, and they answering, All the things which the Lord has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient, Moses took the blood which he had ordered to be kept from the twelve calves, and sprinkled the book of the law and the people, as it were in confirmation of the testament. And therefore he says, for when every commandment had been read, etc., because it was necessary that it be read. For that reading was the promulgation of the law. For it was necessary that the law be promulgated. Taking, et cetera.

Here there is a twofold literal objection. One, because in Ex. XXIV no mention is made of a goat, but of twelve calves. The second, because there also no mention is made of water and scarlet and hyssop. The response to these two is twofold. One, namely, because the Apostle had been raised in the law; hence he knew that this was the practice in purifications according to the law, that the sprinkling was done with the blood of goats and calves and water mixed with hyssop and scarlet wool, as with a sprinkler; and therefore, although this is not treated of in Exodus, nevertheless the Apostle took this from the custom of the legal rite. Or it can be said that this was the first consecration. And therefore the other sanctifications to come were contained in it, as it were, virtually; among which the chief was that which was done on the day of expiation, concerning which Lev. XVI, and another concerning the red heifer, Num. XVI. In the first, however, there was the blood of a calf and a goat; but in the second, water and scarlet wool and hyssop. Therefore, because that first one contained these two, the Apostle referred the whole to that one.

He says therefore, taking the blood, etc., he sprinkled the book and all the people, saying: this is the blood of the testament, which God has commanded to you, namely, its confirmer. Eccli. XXIV, 33: Moses commanded us a law in the precepts of justice. For this blood was a figure of the blood of Christ, by which the new testament was confirmed. And therefore Christ used these very words. Matth. XXVI, 28: this is the blood of the new testament, namely, confirmatory. Now it was prefigured by the blood of the goat on account of the likeness of sinful flesh, and by that of the calf on account of strength. It is mixed, however, with water, because Baptism has its efficacy from the blood of Christ; and it is sprinkled with hyssop, which cleanses the breast, by which faith is signified. Act. c. XV, 9: purifying their hearts by faith. And by the scarlet wool, which is of a red color, charity is signified. Cant. V, 10: my beloved is white and ruddy. For through faith and love of the passion of Christ the people is cleansed. The book of the law is sprinkled too, because the passion of Christ fulfilled the law. Io. XIX, 30: it is consummated. Matth. V, 17: I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.

Then, when he says, the tabernacle also, he sets down the consecration of the tabernacle, because he likewise sprinkled with blood the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry. But against this, because the tabernacle had not yet been made, but in chapter XXV the consecration of the tabernacle is commanded. I respond. It must be said that although it is not the same blood by which the people and the tabernacle were sprinkled, nevertheless the tabernacle too was cleansed with blood. Hence it can be construed thus: he used blood, even when he sanctified the tabernacle. But against this, because in Num. and Lev. VIII it is said, that he anointed the tabernacle with oil. It is said, that he anointed the tabernacle with oil. I respond. It must be said that he is not speaking of that sanctification by which the tabernacle and its vessels were first consecrated, but of that which was done on the day of expiation. Or better, it must be said that he used blood also in the first, because it is said there that he anointed it with oil, and afterward that he sprinkled it. But oil is not a thing for sprinkling, hence it is understood that he first anointed it, and afterward sprinkled it with blood. And these two are necessary for sanctification, namely the power of the blood of Christ, and the oil of mercy, by which the tabernacle is sanctified, that is, the Church, and the vessels, that is, the ministers.

Then, when he says, and almost all things according to the law are cleansed with blood, he goes on to treat of the other legal cleansings. Now there was a twofold cleansing: one from a bodily stain, such as leprosy; the other from a spiritual one, namely sin. The first could pertain to inanimate things, as is evident concerning the leprosy of houses. And the cleansing from this uncleanness was done with the blood of a slain animal, or with the water of expiation, which was made with the blood of the red heifer. And therefore he says almost all things, and not all things simply. Or almost all things, in such a way that the word "almost" qualifies the word "are cleansed," that is, they are almost cleansed, because they were not perfectly cleansed: this happens only through the sacrament of the new law. Or it can qualify the word "all." For not all things were cleansed with blood, because, as it is said, Num. XXXI, v. 23, whatever can endure fire is purged by fire; but those things which could not, are purged with the water of expiation. But for the cleansing from the stain of sin, the shedding of blood is necessary, because it was required for sacrifice. And therefore he says, that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. By which it was prefigured that the remission of sin was to be brought about through the blood of Christ. Hence in the old law the remission of sins came about not by the power of the sacrament, but by the power of faith in Christ. Hence it is frequently said there, the priest shall pray for him, and it shall be forgiven.

Above, the Apostle showed what is common to the new and the old testament, insofar as the old and the new agree; here he shows the difference of each. And concerning this he does two things. For first he shows that in the new there is a better cleansing; second, that it is more perfect, at the place, "nor as often." Again the first is divided into two. For first he shows that, as to that which is cleansed, and as to that by which the cleansing is effected, the cleansing is better in the new; second he makes clear what he said, at the place, "for not into things made with hands."

He says therefore: "it is necessary therefore" that the patterns of the heavenly things, namely the tabernacle itself, which, as regards us, is the pattern, although simply speaking it is the thing patterned and the figure of it, and therefore of lesser dignity, since the thing figured is nobler than the figure, as the body is nobler than the shadow, "be cleansed by these," namely by the sacrifices; "but the heavenly things themselves," namely the new testament, "by better sacrifices than these"; better indeed, because the other things were cleansed by the blood of animals, but in the new testament the cleansing is effected by the blood of Christ. But better things are always cleansed by better things. But these were heavenly, that is, the figure of heavenly things. If therefore those things were cleansed by blood, it is fitting that these heavenly things be cleansed by better blood.

But on the contrary: in heaven there is no uncleanness. I respond. It must be said that, according to the Gloss, by "heavenly things" are understood those things which pertain to the state of the present Church, which are called heavenly. Likewise the faithful bear the image of heavenly things, inasmuch as in mind they dwell in the heavens. Or otherwise, and better, that by "heavenly things" is understood the heavenly homeland. And here the Apostle speaks in the manner in which, in the old testament, the tabernacle was said to be cleansed — not that it had in itself any uncleanness, but because certain irregularities were cleansed, by which people were hindered from approaching the sanctuary. And the heavenly things are said to be cleansed, inasmuch as through the sacrament of the new law sins are purged which hinder entrance into the heavenly things.

Again, he says "sacrifices," in the plural. On the contrary: there is only one sacrifice of Christ. Below, X, 14: "for by one oblation he has perfected forever those who are sanctified." I respond. Although it is one in itself, yet it was figured by the many sacrifices of the old law. From this passage it is gathered that the sacrifices of the old law were good. For "better" is not said except with respect to something good.

Then, when he says "for not into things made with hands," etc., he shows that the heavenly things are cleansed by better sacrifices. For the high priest expiated the sanctuary, which was made by hands; but Christ entered not into holy places made by hands, which were, as regards us, patterns of the true ones, but into heaven itself, which he expiated not in itself, but as regards us, as has been said; but he did not expiate by carnal sacrifices, because Christ did not come to offer such things. Ps. XXXIX, v. 6: "holocaust and sin offering you did not require." Again: "you will not delight in holocausts." Again, above, VII, 14: "it is manifest that the Lord sprang from the tribe of Judah, of which tribe no man attended at the altar"; but he entered into heaven itself. Mark, last chapter: "the Lord Jesus indeed was taken up into heaven." Acts I, 11: "this Jesus, who is taken up from you into heaven." But why? "That he may appear in the presence of God for us."

And the Apostle speaks alluding to the rite of the old law, according to which the high priest who entered the holy of holies stood before the propitiatory to pray for the people; so also Christ entered heaven, as man, that he might stand before God for our salvation. But these differ, because the priest, hindered by the smoke that rose from the censer, did not see the holy of holies, nor did he see any face; but Christ appears before the face of God, not that there is there a bodily countenance, nor any cloud, but manifest knowledge.

But could not Christ, while existing on earth, appear before the face of God, since God sees all things? I respond. It must be said that, just as Augustine, speaking to God, says: "you were with me, and I was not with you," because indeed God is in all things by essence, presence, and power, but the wicked are not with God by grace — so Christ is said to have entered that he may appear before the face of God, because, although he always saw him with clear vision, as one perfectly blessed, yet the state of a wayfarer, as such, does not have this, but only the heavenly state does. And therefore when, perfectly blessed in body and soul, he ascended, he entered that he might appear before the face of God, that is, he entered the place where God is manifestly seen. And this for us. For he ascended for this, that he might prepare a way for us. John XIV, 2f.: "I go to prepare a place for you. And again I will come and take you to myself." Micah II, 13: "he ascended, opening the way before you." For the body ought to follow its head. Matthew XXIV, 28: "wherever the body shall be, there shall the eagles also be gathered together."

Then, when he says "nor as often," he shows that the cleansing of the new testament is more perfect than that of the old. But he shows this by two things. First, by the fact that that one was repeated every year, but this one only once. Likewise as to the effect, because that one could not take away sins, which this one can. Concerning this, then, he does two things. For first he shows the first; second the second, at the place, "having a shadow."

But it must be known that the Apostle had above said three things about Christ: first, that he is high priest; second, what is the dignity of the place he entered; third, how he entered, namely with blood; and these three he has already made clear. Here he declares when he entered, since just as the legal high priest entered once a year, Christ entered only once. And this was the fourth point. Hence concerning this he does three things. First he shows what was done in the old testament; second, that it would be unfitting for this to be done in the new testament, at the place, "otherwise"; third he shows what is done in the new testament, at the place, "but now, once."

For in the old testament the high priest, although he entered only once a year, nevertheless every year, by precept of the law, it was necessary for him to enter with another's blood, as is said in Leviticus XVI, 14. "But Christ entered not into a place made by hand," etc. "Nor that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entered into the holies every year with another's blood."

Then, when he says "otherwise he ought," etc., he proves that it would be unfitting for this to be done in the new testament, because a very great absurdity would follow; for since Christ entered by his own blood, it would follow that he would have had to suffer often from the beginning of the world. But it is not so with the old sacrifice, because that was offered for the sins of the children of Israel. But that people began spiritually when the law was given, and therefore it is not necessary for it to be offered from the beginning of the world. But Christ offered himself for the sins of the whole world, because he himself has been made our propitiation for our sins and those of the whole world, I John II, 2. And thus, if he were offered often, he would have had to be born and suffer from the beginning of the world, which would have been a very great absurdity.

But on the contrary, Apoc. XIII, 8: "the lamb, who was slain from the beginning of the world." I respond. It is true he was slain, that is, prefigured to be slain from the beginning of the world, as in the slaying of Abel.

Then, when he says "but now," he shows what is done in the new testament, and concerning this he does two things. First he gives two reasons why the sacrifice is not repeated in the new testament; second he explains them, at the place, "and as," etc.

He says therefore: "now therefore Christ has appeared once at the consummation of the ages." I Cor. X, 11: "we are they upon whom the ends of the ages are come." And he says this on account of the number of years, because it is now more than a thousand years since he said this. For the ages of the world are taken according to the ages of man, which are principally distinguished according to the state of advancing, not according to the number of years. Thus the first age was before the flood, in which there was neither written law nor punishment, like infancy. Another from Noah to Abraham, and so on for the rest, so that the last age is the present state, after which there is no other state of salvation, just as there is none after old age. But just as in the other ages of man the number of years is determined, but not in old age, since old age begins from the sixtieth year, and some live for a hundred and twenty years, so it is not determined how long this state of the world ought to last; nevertheless it is the consummation of the ages, because there remains no other for salvation.

But in this age Christ appeared once; of which he gives two reasons, namely, why he was offered only once. The first is, because in the old testament sins were not taken away, which is done through the sacrifice of Christ. The other is, because the legal priest did not offer his own blood, as Christ did. Hence he says that he "appeared unto the destruction of sin, by his sacrifice," namely of himself, and therefore that one is repeated, but not this one. I Peter III, 18: "Christ died once for our sins."

Then, when he says "and as," he explains these reasons. And first the second, second the first, at the place, "the law having a shadow." He explains the second by a comparison with other men, hence concerning this he does two things. For first he shows what happens to other men; second he shows what happens in Christ, at the place, "so also Christ, once."

For in any man we find two things: namely, the necessity of dying; likewise, that he rises again, not to be cleansed, but to be judged concerning his deeds. He touches on the first when he says, "and as it is appointed unto men once to die." But on the contrary: it seems that this is not appointed, but rather man brought this about by sinning, since it is said, Wisdom I, 13, that God made not death, neither has he pleasure in the destruction of the living. And a little after: "but the wicked with hands and words have called it to themselves."

I respond. It must be said that in death three things are to be considered: namely, the natural cause, and as to this, from the condition of nature it is appointed that man die once, inasmuch as he is composed of contraries. Second, the gift bestowed: and as to this, there was given to man, as part of his condition, the benefit of original justice, through which the soul held the body together, so that he was able not to die. Third, the merit of death, and so man by sinning merited to lose that benefit, and thus incurred death. Hence he says that the wicked, with their hands — namely, by handling the forbidden fruit — called death to themselves. Man therefore, by demeriting, is the cause of death; but God, as judge. For "the wages of sin is death," Rom. VI, 23. "Once"; which indeed is true of common custom, although some have been raised up again, such as Lazarus and the widow's son, who afterward died. But as to the second, he says, "but after this the judgment," because after they rise again, they will not die again, but judgment will immediately follow. "For we must all be manifested before the judgment seat of Christ, that everyone may receive the proper things of the body, according as he has done," as is said in II Cor. V, 10.

Then, when he says "so also Christ," etc., he shows how these things apply to Christ. And as to the first he says that "so also Christ was offered once." And in this he agrees with the others. But he differs in two things: first, because since Christ did not descend from Adam by way of seminal reason, but only as to bodily substance, he did not contract original sin, and therefore was not a debtor of that state. Gen. II, 17: "in whatsoever day you shall eat of it, you shall die the death." But by his own will he took on death. John X, 18: "no man takes my life from me," etc. Therefore he says that "he was offered." Is. LIII, 7: "he was offered because it was his own will." And I Peter III, 18: "Christ died once for our sins."

Second he differs, because our death is the effect of sin. Rom. VI, 23: "the wages of sin is death." But the death of Christ is destructive of sin. Therefore he says, "to exhaust the sins of many," that is, to remove them. Nor does he say "of all," because the death of Christ, although it is sufficient for all, nevertheless does not have efficacy except as regards those who are to be saved. For not all subject themselves to it through faith and good works.

As to the second he says: "but the second time he will appear without sin." Concerning the second coming he says two things. First he sets down its difference from the first, because the second will be without sin. For in the first, although he did not have sin, yet he came "in the likeness of sinful flesh," Rom. VIII, 3. Likewise in the first he was made a sacrifice for sin. II Cor. V, 21: "him who knew no sin, he has made sin for us." But in the second these things will not be, therefore he says that he will appear without sin.

Second he sets down that which is proper to the second coming, because he will not appear to be judged, but to judge, rendering reward for merits. Hence he says that "he will appear." And indeed, although to all — even to those who pierced him according to the flesh — yet according to his divinity only to the elect, who await him through faith, unto their salvation. Is. XXX, 18: "blessed are all they that wait for him." Phil. III, 20f.: "we await the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will reform the body of our lowliness, conformed to the body of his glory."